Lord Evans of Rainow (Con)

My Lords, I pay tribute to our formidable chair, the noble Baroness, Lady Manningham-Buller, for keeping us all on track. I welcome the Government’s response to the Social Mobility Policy Committee’s report on social mobility and NEETs, and it is encouraging to see progress on earlier identification, better data sharing, the youth guarantee, stronger local partnerships and the development of the “risk of NEET” indicator. The central point I want to make is that NEETs are not simply an education or employment problem; they are a social mobility problem and an economic and place-based problem. Opportunity has a geography. Where a young person grows up shapes the education they receive, the employers they encounter, the transport available to them and, ultimately, the choices they can make about their future. That is why this response must be seen in the context of the much bigger question of how we create opportunity across the country. The Social Mobility Commission’s recent work makes clear that social mobility cannot be separated from the economic dynamism of the place in which people live. That is particularly relevant to NEETs. We can identify risk, offer training and even secure an apprenticeship, but, ultimately, young people need good opportunities to move into. Economic growth and social mobility are not competing objectives. A growing local economy creates jobs, demands skills and supports the services and infrastructure that underpin opportunity. The challenge is ensuring that young people with the fewest opportunities benefit from that growth. I therefore welcome the Government’s recognition that different places face different challenges. We should not assume that the answer looks the same everywhere. The causes of NEETs in a major city are not the same as in a coastal town, a former industrial community or a rural area. The employer base, transport and educational infrastructure and barriers are different. The question is not whether we have a national programme, but whether we have effective local systems that understand their young people and act early. Better data will help, but identification is not intervention. Knowing that a young person is at risk is useful only if someone takes responsibility for acting and ensuring a sustained outcome. Success cannot be measured simply by someone disappearing from the NEET statistics. The real test is whether they make a lasting transition into education, training or employment. The technical education reforms are important but, again, the test is outcomes. Do these qualifications lead to jobs or further training and are they accessible to disadvantaged young people? There is bigger point about social mobility. We often talk about individuals moving upwards, but we must also think about the mobility of places. Can towns experiencing decline attract investment, develop new industries and enable young people to build successful careers? If the answer is yes, we do something more powerful than helping a few individuals leave: we change the places themselves. The challenge is not simply to stop young people becoming NEET but to create places in which young people can see a future, with good schools and colleges, effective careers advice, apprenticeships, early support and, crucially, businesses, investment, innovation and economic growth. These things are interconnected.