Investments in housing, transport, the National Health Service and nuclear power were emphasised by the government in yesterday’s [11 June 2025] Spending Review. However, the criticisms were directed to issues such as reforming the Apprenticeship Levy reform and tackling widespread unemployment, as well as the renewed emphasis on a zero-hours contract ban and ‘fire and rehire’ policies.

The announcements yesterday “get us halfway along the track”, said Neil Carberry, Recruitment & Employment Confederation CEO. “The missing piece of the puzzle in all this, is delivery. Despite talking about the need for a deep pool of talent, there was little on workforce today – yet we know this is the critical part of getting where we need to go without further tax rises. 

“And not just on skills, where the prospect of Apprenticeship Levy reform is exciting, but we await practical details. The upcoming Industrial Strategy is the opportunity to do this – dealing with workforce development as an economic essential, not only an employment rights issue. Across the country, REC members are helping build power stations, renovate our railways, drive British manufacturing and invest in our defence. Proper partnership with the sector to deliver a workforce strategy that meets the needs of the mid-21st Century will be essential.”

Carberry also took aim once more at the government’s approach to NHS funding, following calls by health ministers last week to “eradicate” agency spending in the health sector.

“Extra NHS funding won’t fix its staffing crisis,” he said. “We have built a system where decision-making for any form of hiring into the NHS is glacially slow, and even though the costs of all other forms of hiring now outstrip on-framework agency rates, it is agencies that are called out as ‘expensive’. A true partnership approach to solving the issues – rather than attacking an entire sector on poor evidence – is what is needed. We are ready to help drive up the quality and value the NHS gets.”

Responding to the Spending Review, Tania Bowers, global public policy director at the Association of Professional Staffing Companies (APSCo) said that the review “didn’t reveal any surprises, however it did feel more like a Spending Review promising future returns, rather than one giving much need confidence to businesses today”.

Noting the UK’s high level of unemployment and job losses, Bowers said, she was also critical of the government’s emphasis on employment law reform. “The current situation isn’t being helped by the government’s approach to the professional staffing sector. … It was disappointing to hear the chancellor reference the ban on zero-hours and ‘fire & rehire’ practices in her speech, for example. Yes, exploitation needs to be stamped out in the workforce, however, an unnecessarily rigid process won’t be beneficial for anyone, particularly not skills short remits such as healthcare and the NHS.

“As we highlighted in our response to Wes Streeting following the announcement that agency workers and temporary staffing firms would be limited in use across the NHS, a reduction of access to flexible resources will be damaging in the short-term. The detailed Spending Review document suggests that this practice is being extended across other government departments, with the Department for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs (Defra) and the Foreign, Commonwealth & Development Office (FCDO) also being tasked with reducing reliance on contractors.”

Bowers went on to say: “The focus on skills and training is something we certainly welcome. The money for skills is clearly focused on the young, construction workers and getting the economically inactive back into work, which are all sensible steps. However, this needs to happen in parallel to building up more technical skills, particularly given the focus on AI.

“… Only business can deliver the much-needed growth to support this Spending Review,” Bowers said. “We fear that their optimism is unfounded, given the potential for international outsourcing. We ask them to reconsider the breadth of the measures and undertake detailed updated impact assessments now, whilst the bill is still in Parliament.”

Gi Group UK managing director Pete Taylor has added his voice to criticism of the spending review, noting that the £1.2bn allocated for upskilling and apprenticeships lacks detail.

“The £1.2 bn commitment to training and apprenticeships looks great on the surface,” he said. “But as ever, the devil is in the detail. What does this investment actually mean on the ground? What sectors will it target, and how will it reflect what young people actually want, not just what policymakers think they should want? Today’s younger generation is savvy, better informed, and acutely aware that the traditional job-for-life model no longer exists.

“Training schemes must be flexible, future-facing and linked directly to market demand. What would good look like? I’m not sure anybody outside of those on the frontlines of recruitment could tell you.”

Furthermore, Taylor doubled down on his stance that the Labour government’s decision to ban zero-hour contracts is reductive and harmful: “The government’s stance on zero-hours contracts shows a disconnect with how many people want to work. Forcing one-size-fits-all employment models risks excluding people who actively choose flexible work to balance study, caring responsibilities or other commitments. Saying these contracts are exploitative is reductive and uninformed. Contracts aren’t exploitative, practises are. Rather than banning these contracts outright, we should be focused on tackling exploitative practices wherever they exist, not punishing the flexibility that many workers genuinely value.”

• Comment below on this story. Or let us know what you think by emailing us at [email protected] or tweet us to tell us your thoughts or share this story with a friend.