Comparing the conservative and labour party’s proposals for skills: what’s the problem represented to be?

This paper critically examines UK skills development policies as articulated in two key policy documents: the Conservative government’s White Paper Skills for Jobs: Lifelong Learning for Opportunity and Growth and the Labour Party’s Learning and Skills for Economic Recovery, Social Cohesion and a More Equal Britain. Employing Bacchi’s ‘What’s the Problem Represented to Be?’ approach, the analysis reveals a shared reliance on human capital theory and a technocratic view of education that prioritises economic outcomes. The paper contributes original insights into how both policies’ over-reliance on market mechanisms risks perpetuating inequalities and eroding the public good aspect of education. It argues that the UK’s consensus around skills remains reliant on Human Capital Theory after 30 years, despite the lack of evidence that this approach effectively addresses social inequalities or enhances economic productivity. By examining these two key policy documents, the paper contributes to the broader literature on the role of Human Capital Theory in British educational policies and skills strategies. It highlights how economistic assumptions have consistently shaped educational outcomes and advocates for a more holistic approach to education policy that integrates broader social and economic considerations, aiming to balance economic productivity with personal development and social empowerment.