My 2 children are blessed enough to go to a terrific school, rated entirely "Good" or "Outstanding" by OFSTED, with tremendous committed staff, surrounded by playing fields and open countryside and are in class sizes of 15 and 13 (smaller than highly regarded independent schools nearby). It is of course a village state primary school. Because it had a few surplus places we exercised choice to send them there, even though we live just outside its catchment area (although the countryside being what it is, it is the 2nd closest school to us). Far, far too many other families don't have the same choice.
George Osborne and David Cameron have both been in the headlines and on the back foot recently about school choice. They both live in London where there are not enough places in good schools. Between them, they exemplify the limited choices facing parents: scrabble to get their children into one of the good state schools, many of which are Church schools, or pay for increasingly expensive private education (if they can afford or scrimp and save the fees to do so).
The proper Conservative reaction to this is not to be defensive, but to articulate a clear and focussed anger that after 10 years of staggering billions "invested" into "education, education, education", standards remain so low. There is nothing "nasty" about the passions this should invoke.
This is no impotent rage: we know the answer: give parents the power to open new schools, as they do in Sweden. So, if there is such a demand for more places in Church schools that some parents end up trying to bend the rules, why not simply open more church schools?
Michael Gove is already on the case. We need to hear much, much more of the same.
Recent Comments