The state of Britain's youth and its impact on the nation's future is a pressing concern. We're facing a crisis where a significant portion of our young population feels left behind, with only a quarter believing in a fair society. This sense of disillusionment is deeply rooted in the post-2008 economic climate, the ongoing challenges of the Covid era, and the rapid advancements in AI technology.
Alan Milburn's review on youth unemployment sheds light on a critical issue: Britain's failure to utilize the talents of over a million young people not in education, employment, or training (NEET). This problem extends beyond job prospects, reflecting a broader erosion of the principles of a just and prosperous economy.
The root causes of this issue can be traced back to the years of austerity. While other factors like Labour's economic management and the AI revolution have played a role, the consequences of Tory spending cuts are now coming to the fore. Milburn highlights that the risk of a child becoming NEET can be identified in their early preschool years, emphasizing the need to examine the past 16 years of education and public sector policy changes.
The impact of these cuts is evident across the board. Youth services in England have seen a 76% funding reduction, resulting in the closure of thousands of youth clubs and a loss of vital social workers. School spending has been frozen for 14 years, and investment in school infrastructure has plummeted by a quarter, leaving many buildings in a state of disrepair.
Instead of investing in preventative measures, Britain has ended up spending vast sums on managing the consequences of these failures. The NEET crisis is a prime example, with the state spending £25 on benefits for every £1 spent on employment support for young people.
Sure Start, a network of family hubs introduced by Labour, provides another cautionary tale. The Conservatives' decision to effectively scrap this network was supposed to save money, but research shows that as funding dried up, spending on child protection and safeguarding increased significantly.
This pattern of reactive rather than proactive spending is evident across government. Instead of investing in public services to prevent problems, the state is constantly firefighting. The task ahead for Andy Burnham is to shift this short-sighted approach and rebuild what Demos calls a 'preventive state', focusing on investing in the foundations of society.
The potential economic and social benefits of such a shift are substantial. The NHS, for instance, spends a significant portion of its budget on treating preventable conditions. Research shows that restoring the UK's health to 2014 levels could boost GDP by 2% and generate a £72 billion dividend for public finances.
The challenge for ministers is clear: the NEET crisis costs the economy and government finances £125 billion a year and rising. Getting more young people into work would not only improve their life chances but also drive economic growth and improve public finances.
However, building a preventive state is not without its challenges, especially in the current fiscal climate. Moving money upstream to invest in prevention takes time, and the savings may not materialize for years, often benefiting a different government. This timing issue has often led to skepticism from the Treasury.
Despite these challenges, refusing to make this transition is detrimental. Britain is already facing the consequences of a crumbling NHS, a rising welfare bill, and a weak economy. Milburn's review is a critical opportunity for Britain to rebuild a preventive state and address the issues faced by its youth. The alternative is a future where young people feel lost and the nation struggles to overcome the costs of its failures.
