I would argue that there are some fantastic examples of this in England. The introduction of the apprenticeship levy and the work of the Institute for Apprenticeships and Technical Education has focused on developing a more rounded work-based learning curriculum for employers and employees – focused on industry praxis. However, the Augar Review continues to suggest that more could be done to support progression students and resolve some of the inherent tensions in partnership working across further and higher education. Again, the pandemic may have some significant impact on how that plays out financially and how we define the range of educational experiences we might want to create. The question, then, is how do you create a skill system which is bold enough and broad enough to be forward-looking and encourage people to rise to that challenge of the future, while at the same time reconciling the role that our education skills have to play in keeping the economy going? These are perhaps two sides of the same coin that has often tried to be conceptualised in relation to social mobility being a key part of tertiary education. It is a fact that studying at higher levels increases life chances, improves public-health, increases democratic participation and so much more. One of the things that we need to consider in how we design the structure and form of the curriculum in the future, is how we look at what we are measuring and how well we value that (Biesta posed this question in 2010 in his book ‘Good Education In An Age Of Measurement’). For example, do we want some narrow metrics around the role of education and social mobility which are focused on and very traditional forms of learning, or do we need to think about the whole notion of what selective education looks like and how education can be broader than simply measuring the skills people acquire? In my work, over the years, I have talked to many employers. The notion of problem-finding, problem-solving, and critique (Sennett, ‘The Craftsman’, 2012) along with intra-preneurealism and being able to be collaborative, are as important as some of those subject specific skills that all of us have acquired over time in our working lives. So, as we think about the opportunities that may emerge from the Post-16 Education Bill we have to, as educators, consider new ways we can enable life chances and thus the economy to flourish, both now and in the future. We need to be bold in our ideas and how those ideas could and should be funded so that the curriculum is inclusive and diverse but also relevant. While one of the criticisms of the Skills Bill is that it lacks some detail, we have an opportunity to fill in all the detail so that students are, at any point, able to or choose to enter a period of learning, become expert custodians of the planet, economies, and of culture tomorrow. Chris Millward’s recent HEPI blog details how attainment gaps are being closed, and how the link between geography and educational remains but the link is weakening. The blog itself lays the challenge to continue to work of widening participation and social mobility in the coming years. Indeed, it will be up to us to determine how that continues to develop across the skills agenda.