Question

Asked by Jayne Kirkham to Department for Work and Pensions on 02 November 2026 — tabled under the Andy Burnham government

To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions what the apprenticeship budget was for 2025/26; what proportion of that budget was spent in total; and what proportion was spent on (1) training for apprenticeships with levy-paying employers, (2) traini

Answer (holding answer)

Answered by Lilian Greenwood (Labour)

The Department for Work and Pensions has indicated that it will not be possible to answer this question within the usual time period. An answer is being prepared and will be provided as soon as it is available.

Verdict: RED (5/100) DEFERRED

The reply did not provide any of the figures requested. It said the question could not be answered within the usual time limit and that a fuller answer was being prepared, so all four parts were deferred, including the 2025/26 apprenticeship budget, the proportion spent overall, and the proportion spent on levy-paying employers' apprenticeships. The asker would have no specific information to act on and would most likely need to follow up for the actual numbers.

How we got there

Question itemCoverageSpecificityRationale
What was the apprenticeship budget for 2025/26? Deferred Generic The reply only says the question cannot be answered within the usual time period and that an answer is being prepared, so it acknowledges the request for the 2025/26 apprenticeship budget figure but gives no figure and no substantive answer.
What proportion of that apprenticeship budget was spent in total? Deferred Generic The reply defers the proportion of the budget spent in total to a later answer, without giving any proportion or spend data.
What proportion of that apprenticeship budget was spent on training for apprenticeships with levy-paying employers? Deferred Generic The reply defers the proportion spent on levy-paying employers' apprenticeships to a later answer and provides no breakdown.
What proportion of that apprenticeship budget was spent on the second category listed in item (2), which is cut off in the source text and so cannot be fully specified. Deferred Generic The reply's generic deferral covers this figure request, though the item's cut-off second category is never addressed, so this is only a deferred acknowledgement with no substantive content.

Feedback on this grading

Think this verdict is wrong, or that the question and answer have been mismatched? Let us know.

Submitting this needs Google reCAPTCHA to block spam, which sets cookies from google.com on your device — see our Cookies policy for details. Accept these cookies to show the form.