PolicyLens

Liberal Democrats - Education

Introduce a Tutoring Guarantee

Provide targeted tutoring support for pupils who need extra help.

Last updated: May 2026.

Read the policy-specific methodology note

Policy baseline

The manifesto includes a Tutoring Guarantee in school spending. Cost depends on pupil eligibility, tutor quality and take-up.

  • Targets pupils with learning gaps.
  • Quality assurance matters more than hours alone.
  • Effects are strongest if targeted.

Core trade-offs

The direct beneficiaries are pupils with learning gaps. The costs fall mainly on taxpayers and scarce teaching labour. The main economic question is low-quality tutoring has weak returns.

  • Pupils with learning gaps gain most directly.
  • Costs fall mainly on taxpayers and scarce teaching labour.
  • Key risk: low-quality tutoring has weak returns.

Fiscal impact by 2028-29

+GBP 0.4bn to +GBP 2.0bn. Central estimate: +GBP 0.8bn.

  • Positive numbers mean net fiscal cost; negative numbers mean Exchequer savings.
  • Main channel is the scored tax, spending or delivery change.
  • Offsets depend on tax receipts, behaviour and pass-through.
  • Range reflects uncertain implementation and economic response.
  • This is not an official costing.

Economic impact by 2028-29

  • Jobs: Education hiring rises; shortages and retention problems may cap delivery.
  • Wages: Teachers, childcare staff or students gain; taxpayers fund the cost.
  • Prices: Childcare prices may fall if supply expands; wage pressure can offset subsidies.
  • GDP / productivity: Long-run gains possible; short-run GDP effects depend on staffing and quality.

Assessment

This is a real trade-off, not a free gain. Pupils with learning gaps benefit, while taxpayers and scarce teaching labour bear most costs. Overall output depends on behaviour, capacity and pass-through.

Confidence: Medium-low. Higher on the policy target and fiscal channel; lower on behaviour, pass-through and economy-wide effects.

Main risks

  • Staffing shortage: Recruitment and retention can limit delivery.
  • Quality variation: Extra places or grants do not guarantee high-quality provision.
  • Long payback: Economic returns take years and are hard to score fiscally.

Safeguards

  • Target shortages and disadvantaged pupils.
  • Audit quality and staff retention.
  • Evaluate outcomes before expansion.

Academic evidence

Jackson, Johnson and Persico, Quarterly Journal of Economics, 2016

School spending outcomes

Higher school spending improved adult outcomes, especially for low-income children.

Supports long-run gains from education spending.

School Spending and Educational Outcomes (2016)

Chetty, Friedman and Rockoff, American Economic Review, 2014

Teacher effectiveness

High-value-added teachers are associated with better long-run student outcomes.

Relevant to teacher recruitment and quality.

Measuring the Impacts of Teachers (2014)

UK government evidence

Sources

Other Liberal Democrats policies

PolicyLens estimates are illustrative and should not be treated as official costings.