NEETS and TATTIES: Too many cooks are spoiling the broth on youth unemployment.

Daniel Wild, Associate Director and Will Gardner, Junior Consultant | Public Affairs and Corporate Communications

On Monday, Pat McFadden, backed by celebrity chef Tom Kerridge, announced a £1 billion package aimed at tackling the UK’s growing NEETs crisis. The plan includes grants of up to £3,000 for businesses hiring eligible young people, plus £2,000 for small and medium-sized firms taking on new apprentices aged 16–24.

To give the government credit, the move reflects a genuine effort to address the problem, and it is understood to be a personal mission of the PM. Almost 957,000 people aged 16–24 are currently NEET, and many are economically inactive, not even looking for work. But while the government’s Youth Jobs Guarantee and latest funding package show intent, there is no real indication that it is a permanent solution to the problem. Critics, like the TUC, point to the apprenticeship levy’s poor record, with apprenticeship starts among younger age groups falling sharply in recent years, and there are warnings that the youth guarantee may only reach one in every twenty-four NEETs.

The government has linked the crisis to disrupted learning during the pandemic, poor mental health support and skills gaps. Whilst undoubtedly those factors matter, they are only part of the story. Ultimately, the deeper problem is that government policy is pulling in two directions at once, and this is not an isolated case.

While ministers say they want to get Britain working, other decisions are making it harder for the very sectors most likely to employ young people. Retail, hospitality and leisure remain some of the biggest entry points into work, yet they are also among the sectors under greatest pressure from higher business rates and employer NICs contributions. Research by WPI Strategy for the Retail Jobs Alliance found that almost 45,000 jobs held by young people could be at risk in retail by 2028 because of business rates changes alone. Hospitality leaders have made similar warnings.

This creates a contradiction which should be fairly obvious. On one hand, government raises costs for employers in the very sectors that give young people their first step into work. On the other, it offers grants to encourage those same employers to hire. That is not joined-up policy. Instead, it creates a cycle in which the state aims to raise revenue through fiscal tools which make youth employment harder for businesses, then uses that same revenue to subsidise those same businesses to offset the damage.

For those of us who were fortunate have them, we know well that those first jobs, whether in pubs, shops or anything else, are where one cuts their teeth working with (often difficult) people, teams, and customers. Those roles provide the practical work experience and financial support that help young people move into higher-skilled sectors later on. The government should not treat high-growth industries and foundational sectors as opposites when those foundational industries produce the resilient staff who go on to join those high-growth industries. One could also opine on the positive mental health impact, sense of community,  and pride in place a thriving high street brings to an area but that is perhaps ancillary to the point here.

At a time when graduate competition feels insurmountable, housing seems unaffordable and student debt is overwhelming, many young people feel shut out of the promise that hard work will lead to progress. We know well that disenfranchisement and detachment from the state drives polarisation, and it is perhaps no surprise that young people seem to be turning en masse to the Greens and Reform UK.

The NEETs crisis is symptomatic of a government of line cooks with no real head chef guiding the vision. Each department adds its own ingredients on top of the other, some tax here, some grants there, but no one seems quite sure what the final dish is meant to be. Perhaps that is why Tom Kerridge was brought in for the announcement. Ironically, he has himself argued for cuts to VAT, business rates and employer National Insurance. In his own words “you’re not going to solve anything by losing jobs”.