The United Kingdom faces a persistent and deeply entrenched crisis regarding those described by the acronym “Neets”—young people between the ages of 16 and 24 who are neither employed nor engaged in any form of education or training. What began in 1999 as a focus on approximately 170,000 teenagers has ballooned into a national issue involving nearly one million young people. The situation is increasingly viewed as a moral crisis, carrying a staggering annual cost to the taxpayer estimated at £22 billion, while simultaneously dimming the future prospects of a generation. Aren’t studying or being trained up – has seen hundreds upon hundreds of thousands in their late teens or early-20s struggle to find a decent future for well over a decade, the reality of so-called “Neets” in the UK – young people who haven’t got jobs. The focus was on 170,000 or so teenagers who were not in education, employment or training, when the phrase Neet was first coined by Tony Blair’s Downing Street in 1999. Add in a pandemic and years of a sluggish economy, it’s acute – with nearly a million under-25s in that situation, after many attempts at solving the problem. It won’t be a surprise to them when this is launched and that gives it a fighting chance of actually being implemented. From one of the Blairites still standing, with the expensive Paul Smith knitwear to match, it’s a real expansion of the state’s involvement in the next generation.
Former Labour MP Alan Milburn has spent the past year authoring a comprehensive review of this systemic failure. His forthcoming report, which is expected to be published this Tuesday, proposes a fundamental departure from previous, short-term initiatives. Milburn argues that the current government must demonstrate a genuine willingness to engage in difficult political battles if it hopes to achieve substantive reform. The scale of the challenge is significant; in Liverpool alone, the unemployment rate for 16 to 24-year-olds in Merseyside currently sits at 14.5%. After a year in the making, a tome full of proposals to try and fix it once and for all will be published on Tuesday. Former Labour MP Alan Milburn, wants you to know that Andy Burnham knows exactly what’s coming, the canny smooth talker behind the huge review. But his collection of proposals is not for the faint-hearted. And Milburn himself cites figures that puts the cost of the issue at £22bn a year. Any time soon, make much difference to the ballooning costs to welfare, for all Milburn’s talk of grand ambition â his plans will not.
Central to Milburn’s strategy is a radical redistribution of public funds.
He identifies a profound imbalance in state spending, noting that the government currently allocates 25 times more capital to benefits for young people than it does to active employment support. His proposed framework would shift this ratio toward a more equitable two-to-one balance. While he acknowledges this will necessitate cutting certain benefits for many young people, he intends to offset these reductions by significantly expanding state-subsidized apprenticeships, health support, and vocational training. But a big increase on the other, a big cut to state support on one side of the ledger.
Specific measures outlined in the report include removing the ability of under-25s to claim the personal independence payment and the health-related components of universal credit. To ensure long-term accountability, Milburn is advocating for new legislation that would provide a legal guarantee of support for young people. This guarantee would ensure access to a job, a training placement, or necessary health treatment, effectively obligating the state—likely through local councils or regional mayors—to take direct responsibility for these outcomes. And to make sure that government gets really serious about improving the mess, Milburn is asking for a new law that would give young people a guarantee of help and support – a job, an apprenticeship, a training place, or. Or to provide accommodation or advice to homeless people, but the idea is to put a legal duty on the authorities in a similar vein to councils’ obligation to look after children in care. But the precise way the powers might be used in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland will be worked out when it gets to the finer details of draft laws, the recommendations apply to the whole UK.
Addressing potential criticisms, Milburn emphasized that he has avoided the so-called “elephant’s trap” of creating a system where individuals could pursue litigation against the Prime Minister for failing to secure a specific, desired job. Despite the ambitious nature of the proposals, the implementation timeline remains a point of contention. Experts suggest the plan could take up to a decade to yield a significant reduction in the national welfare bill. Furthermore, the report will require billions in upfront investment, despite the long-term savings potential. Where a feisty teenager could sue the prime minister if they didn’t get the job they fancied, he told me he won’t fall into the “elephant’s trap”. No politician would argue for the status quo. Although not the £6bn guesstimates that have done the rounds, and it will require taxpayers’ cash at the start.
A critical political fault line has emerged regarding how these policies will be applied. While Milburn believes the changes should apply to current claimants, No 10 has signaled that the government is prepared for the necessary welfare arguments, indicating that any new laws must act as rapidly as possible on those currently receiving benefits. Some within the Labour party have expressed concerns about the political risks involved, though others see the plan as a necessary shift toward concrete, actionable policy rather than just abstract rhetoric.
The government’s response will be closely monitored, as the Prime Minister has already labeled the report a “watershed moment.” Opposition parties have criticized the potential for delay, with the Conservatives arguing that their own plans for economic reform—including halving employer National Insurance contributions—would address the root causes of the issue more effectively. The debate highlights the tension between the desire for immediate fiscal relief and the need for a sustainable, long-term solution to youth unemployment.
Regardless of the political sparring, the scale of the challenge remains immense.
Liberal Democrat research released this weekend projects that if current trends persist, the number of Neets will continue to climb. The number of Neets would hit 1.26 million by 2031, new research from the Lib Dems this weekend suggests that if nothing was done.
As the government prepares to review these wide-ranging recommendations, the pressure to move beyond simple jargon and implement permanent systemic change has reached a critical juncture. According to westminster jargon often describes earnest sets of recommendations published in, Like this as “wide-ranging”.
The success of these proposals will ultimately hinge on the government’s capacity to navigate the intense public and political scrutiny that accompanies any move to reshape the welfare state.
