Nezamul Hasan | 9 November 2026

Britain has some of the world’s leading universities, a strong research base and real potential to benefit from artificial intelligence (AI). Yet too many young people struggle to move from education into meaningful work. I wrote this paper to examine why this is happening and how existing government policies could respond more effectively.

Between April and June 2026, approximately 981,000 young people aged 16 to 24 were not in education, employment or training (NEET), about 13% of their age group, according to the Office for National Statistics. The Milburn review added something that shaped my thinking more than any other number. In 2023/24, an estimated 314,000 young people aged 18 to 24 in England were outside work and education and not receiving benefits personally. That is an estimate for 2023/24, not a current count, but it shows that services starting from the benefits system will miss many young people.

This is not only an employment problem. It involves education, health, disability, inequality, limited work experience and a labour market that AI is changing. Britain must prepare young people for new opportunities without losing the experience and independent skills that careers are built on.

The government has already introduced or announced reforms in technical education, youth employment, apprenticeships and AI in schools. The question is how these policies can work together, reach young people still outside them, and deliver lasting results.

Six recommendations

1. Intervene early and reach young people outside the benefits system. Improve early identification and support for young people at risk of disengagement, especially those who are not claiming benefits or using existing services.

2. Make education flexible and learning transferable. Let young people change pathways without losing completed learning, time or opportunities, and test better recognition of prior learning between academic and technical routes.

3. Protect first jobs in the AI economy. Evaluate existing youth employment programmes to ensure entry-level jobs provide real training, mentoring and a route to progression.

4. Integrate health, disability and employment support. Improve coordination between education, health, social care and employment services, particularly for young people facing complex barriers.

5. Prepare teachers and students for the AI age. Support responsible use of AI in education while protecting independent thinking and genuine learning. Judge educational technology by demonstrated benefits, not by how widely it is adopted.

6. Strengthen accountability and value for money. Use existing government data and independent evaluation to measure sustained outcomes, identify inequalities and establish whether public money is working.

From recommendations to results

I propose a phased approach built on existing programmes and partnerships, with clear responsibilities, baselines, costed business cases and independent evaluation. The paper makes no speculative funding estimate. Extra spending should be justified by credible evidence of costs and benefits. The test is what happens to young people after they receive support: whether they keep learning, find suitable work and build their skills.

Lessons from abroad

The paper draws on examples from China, Finland, Germany, Japan, Scotland, South Korea, Taiwan and the United States, and separates announced policies from results that have been independently demonstrated. The aim is to find ideas Britain can adapt and test, not to copy another country’s system.

Read the full paper

The full paper contains the evidence, the analysis of government policy, six detailed recommendations and an implementation roadmap.

It is free to read, with no registration or email address required.

The aim of this paper is to help find solutions that work, so I invite policymakers, government departments, mayoral authorities and researchers to consider these findings, test their feasibility and build on them. I also welcome criticism from anyone who works with young people. If a recommendation does not match what you see on the ground, I want to hear it, because the proposals are only useful if they hold up in practice.

The views and recommendations in this paper are my own and not those of any organisation I work with.