How many MPs does it take to fix a lightbulb? Given the recent state of affairs in Westminster, God knows.

We do, however, know one thing for sure: the FE sector is hoping it only takes 165 to make the chancellor listen to their pleas about funding.

For that is the number of MPs from four parties who threw their weight behind an open letter to Philip Hammond.

Co-authored by Conservative MP Richard Graham and Labour MP Nic Dakin, the letter states that while government policy has protected the incomes of schools and universities, colleges have been dealt an average real-terms funding cut of 30 per cent over the past 10 years. Here’s hoping that this won’t be new news to Mr Hammond.

The letter also suggests that the upcoming spending review is a chance to announce an above-inflation increase in FE funding that would boost skills, productivity and social mobility.

Mr Dakin said: “From my years as a college principal, I know how important this issue is. Our colleges are the engines of social mobility, transforming the prospects of our young people and delivering the skills our local businesses want. It is vital that the government invests in our colleges.”

And so the question remains, will the letter actually work and bring about an increase in FE funding? Below, Tes’ FE editor, Stephen Exley, offers his view.

‘The DfE can’t keep blaming the Treasury’

The list of signatories on the open letter on FE funding (see above) makes for interesting reading, with notable Conservatives Boris Johnson, Sir Nicholas Soames and Sir Hugo Swire among their number. These are by no means the usual suspects from the Labour backbenches.

What this means is that, firstly, the Treasury is under pressure to deliver. And secondly - and perhaps more significantly - so is the Department for Education. Simply pointing the blame at the Treasury’s accountants is no longer a good enough excuse.

Tes understands that the DfE is fully aware of this, with department staffers having been tasked with drawing up options of how to fund a 16-19 increase from within its existing budget, should
the Treasury fail to come up with the goods. 

Let’s hope that the powerful case for FE funding made by the sector and the DfE will persuade Mr Hammond that it’s worth increasing spending in this area, which is in dire need of a boost. But the fact that finding extra funding for FE from elsewhere in the DfE is under consideration at all would appear to be a small step in the right direction.

Stephen Exley is Tes’ FE editor