Recommendation 22

In written evidence, several organisations raised concerns about the apprenticeship levy, and suggested that reforms to the levy would improve the training opportunities available. The British Retail Consortium suggested that employers should be permitted to spend levy funds on high-quality shorter courses, including functional skills training, 25 Q 42 ; C&AG’s Report, paras 3.18, 4.2 26 Qq 32, 56–58 27 C&AG’s Report, paras 2.14, 2.16 28 C&AG’s Report, para 4.12 29 Qq 48–49 14 Developing workforce skills for a strong economy where a full 12-month apprenticeship was not necessary.30 Similarly, Heathrow Airport Ltd suggested that employers should be able to spend their levy contributions on modular courses, and that levy funds should sometimes be unlocked to address time-limited labour shortages, such as the HGV driver shortage.31 City & Guilds argued that there should be a broader, more flexible skills levy, with a ringfenced commitment to apprenticeships, to better support employers and job seekers.32 DfE accepted that employers had made some reasonable requests about making sure the apprenticeship system was properly responsive to their needs. It explained that it had made some changes to make the programme more flexible – for example, by introducing flexi-job apprenticeships for industries where people often do their training through multiple employers.33 Colleges