Let us hope

Article based on ‘Let us hope’, The Economist

An ational education commission in 1861 said that education should be “sound and cheap”. It is arguable whether Britain has reached this – a quarter of all primary school children leave without being able to read and write properly. The OECD blamed Britain’s low economic productivity for its badly educated workers. Spending in education has gone up by 45% in real terms since 1997, but it has little to show for it.

When Labour came into power in 1997, they argued that the education system needs to be changed in “standards, not structures”. The government has been digging a money pile and now, belatedly, it is attempting structural change.

The way to measure any reform is to see whether it goes in the right direction and by how far. The old commission stated three main aims of the education system: it should be universal, “sound” (or in more modern terms, “high-quality”) and if not cheap, at least cost-effective. Everything else is ideology.

Although Britons are usually unideological people, when it comes to education they are quite dogmatic. Many people feel that private education should be outlawed and that the idea of private providers educating children – even when that education is paid for by the state – is widely regarded as unacceptable. Although the government has failed to use central control to spend its money better, many politicians find the behaviour of schools being treated as a business and parents like customers distasteful. It is widely felt that education should not be treated as though it were commerce.

However, other countries have no qualms over whether the government should fund private education. In some American states, parents can take government money to any school they chose, being state funded or private – they have a choice, and schools have an incentive to improve.

Parents in the Netherlands and Sweden have more choice in schools than British parents, where they can top fees up a bit, and choose a school of their liking. This gives an incentive to schools to attract more students and can get more money by taking on those students who are considered difficult to teach.

However, such radical reforms are not on the political agenda in Britain. The government’s new reforms which are due for debate in February only just push the system in the right direction.

Although the reforms are a modest advance, they are hardly the radical departure Mr Blair claims. They are so unpopular with the Labour MP’s, with at least 100 Labour MP’s opposing them. John Prescott, the deputy prime minister, who is against the new reforms, argues that “if you set up a school and it becomes a good school, the great danger is that everyone wants to go there”. Mr Blair should be expecting most of his support to come from the Oppostion, where David Cameron, the leader of the Conservatives has promised to back the new reforms if they are not watered down.

This new education debate has revealed a deeply depressing aspect of modern Britain. Genuine radicalism seems to be impossible. Until Britain opens up its mind a little more, schools and hospitals will remain second-rate.