By Richard McKeever
Last week the Audit Commission’s “Against the Odds” report revealed that Young people not in education, employment or training (NEET) at 16-18 have poorer life chances than their peers and are more likely to be a long term cost to public finances.
In a time of austerity, government can ill-afford the estimated £13 billion in public finance costs that will be incurred by the 2008 NEET cohort over their lifetimes. The blight on individual lives is even more appalling, young men who were NEET are three times more likely to suffer from depression, and five times more likely to have a criminal record, than their peers.
This week Community Links publish our new survey of young people not in employment, education or training. Our research suggests that the vast majority want a job and are actively looking for work. All but two of thirty five NEET young interviewed were keen to work and actively looking for a job. A significant number were also highly qualified but struggling to find work in an increasingly competitive employment market.
“I’ve applied for loads of jobs but I’m up against people with lots more experience who are going for the same jobs as me,” said one young man with ten GCSEs, three ‘A’ levels and a BSC in Computing and Business. “I’ve been to graduate careers fairs where I’m competing for entry level positions with people who have been made redundant from Lehman Brothers and other big firms. It’s incredibly hard to get your foot on the ladder.”
The label NEET covers a diverse group; whilst just over a quarter of the young people interviewed had five or more grade A-C GCSE’s, a similar number had no qualifications at all. More than half of those with no qualifications had been excluded from school.
Only half of the young people who took part in the survey were claiming benefits, relying instead on support from family and friends. The absence of the most basic level of financial support made it extremely difficult for some to stay in education. One 17 year old described how he had enrolled on a full time course but could not find the £20 per week needed to pay his travel costs. Poverty had a big impact; there have recently been calls to reduce or cut benefits for young people who refuse work or training. But a lack of cash is the very thing causing some young people to fail. Some who simply could not afford the cost of travelling to college, for instance, were abandoning education as a result. One 20 year old woman described how she had been unable to complete a Business Studies degree because she was sharing a two bedroom flat with eight other family members. “Five of us sleep in one room,” she said. “There was just nowhere to work or think and after 18 months I had to leave the course.”
Others from poor backgrounds were giving up on higher education because they were afraid they would be unable to repay high levels of debt accrued to cover tuition fees and living costs.
A more generous level of support for young people in education and training could cut the risk of young people becoming unemployed for extended periods, and reduce the long term cost to society. Taking away financial support by cutting benefits or other punitive measures is likely to have precisely the opposite effect to that intended and lead to greater demands on public finances in the long term.
