Following the Government’s decision to restrict apprenticeship funding only to those aged sixteen to twenty-one as of January 2026, I led a debate last week on Level 7 apprenticeships. These apprenticeships are routes that provide master’s-level qualifications for professions that are crucial to shaping our homes, business and communities.
What emerged was a stark warning: the Government’s decision to cut off funding for anyone over 21 does not “rebalance opportunity”, as Ministers claim. It removes opportunity altogether.
Before entering Parliament, I taught architecture at the University of Bath and ran an architectural practice. I’ve spent years watching talented young people, many from families with no tradition of higher education, start their careers because apprenticeships finally offered them a route that did not require seven years of debt. In my rural constituency in the South West, where there is no university and where a Government assessment identified “acute areas of deprivation” across all four towns, apprenticeships are not a luxury. They are often the only pathway into a skilled career.
Yet from January 2026, the Government will remove funding for Level 7 apprenticeships for anyone aged twenty-two or over. On paper, this sounds like prioritising younger learners. In practice, it obliterates the route entirely. A Level 6 architectural assistant apprenticeship takes four years, meaning that even those who start at 18 will be at least 22 by the time they progress. I personally have never met anyone who completed the entire course before the age of 25. Clearly, this policy was designed without any understanding of how the built-environment professions actually work.
Architecture has long struggled with diversity, being a profession traditionally run by a very narrow, predominantly male, sector of the middle class. Yet apprenticeships have made a meaningful difference. The Royal Institute of British Architects (RIBA) data shows Level 7 apprenticeships achieve near gender parity, something the profession has never seen. These are precisely the routes that have opened the door to those from under-represented backgrounds. Removing funding at 21 will slam that door shut.
This is dire news, Britain is already facing a shortage of planning officers, architects, surveyors and construction professionals. Even the Minister acknowledged “a significant shortage of town planners”. Local authorities rely on Level 7 apprenticeships to grow their own talent because they cannot compete with private-sector salaries. Meanwhile, Skills England estimates that over 250,000 additional workers will be needed by 2028 just to maintain current construction output. Yet the Government insists there will be “no significant impact” on the pipeline of highly skilled professionals.
This could not be further from the truth. Without Level 7 apprenticeships, the Government will not fix our cumbersome planning system, they will not deliver net zero housing and they certainly will not deliver the 1.5 million homes they promised.
The Minister argued that older learners can simply switch to “non-apprenticeship” master’s degrees. What I fear the Minister does not understand is that Level 6 apprentices cannot access the same undergraduate student finance as those who take the full-time degree route. A full-time Part 2 student can receive £46,000 in support; a Level 6 apprentice receives only £10,000. This risks punishing an entire generation of learners that have already had their wings clipped by years of Conservative neglect. Given that this is a fact that Labour are always quick to bring up I am surprised by the Ministers’ lack of concern for this lost generation.
There is a simple solution, raising the eligibility age for built-environment professions to 25, a measure supported by professional bodies and universities, would protect diversity, protect SMEs, and protect the nation’s ability to build the homes and infrastructure we desperately need.
Failing that, extending the implementation date would at least avoid pushing current apprentices off a cliff edge before new models are even designed.
These apprenticeships represent the first route that genuinely opens up the architectural profession to those from disadvantaged backgrounds. Without them, we risk closing the door on the first real breakthrough to open the architectural profession in thirty years.
The built environment affects every home, every community, every high street. Cutting off the next generation of skilled professionals is not only unfair, it is short sighted and economically reckless. We cannot fix the housing crisis in this country unless we start at the foundations, solving Britain’s chronic planning and construction workforce shortages.
If the Government is serious about levelling up, serious about housing, and serious about skills, it must rethink this policy. Apprentices cannot afford to lose this route and, quite frankly, Britain cannot afford to lose these apprentices.
If the Government is serious about levelling up, housing and skills, it must rethink its policy on Level Seven Apprenticeships
