New Education Secretary must escape the Blob

Mrs May was right to replace Justine Greening, who frustrated reforms to improve state schools

From personally deciding that Donald Trump should come to Britain on a state visit to unilaterally imposing Brexit policy on the Cabinet, I have been accused of countless ridiculous things since working for the Prime Minister. This week, “allies” of Justine Greening claimed I orchestrated her sacking as education secretary. This is obviously completely untrue, and I played no part whatsoever in the reshuffle. I do, however, agree with Theresa May’s decision: Greening’s replacement by Damian Hinds was the bright point in an otherwise limited set of changes.

Despite reports to the contrary, Greening was unpopular with officials, she frustrated reformers, and she exasperated the Prime Minister. Charged with making Britain “the world’s great meritocracy”, she put the brakes on policies that work, like free schools, and devised bureaucratic initiatives of little value. She made Nicky Morgan, a managerial education secretary, resemble Michael Gove, education’s great radical.

Thanks to Gove’s reforms, English children are better educated than ever. Our primary schools are rising in the international league tables, and nearly two million more pupils attend good or outstanding schools compared to 2010. Nevertheless, the new Education Secretary has a full in-tray, and must avoid Greening’s error, which was to succumb to “the blob”, the education establishment that resists all change.

His first task is to breathe life back into school reform. Much of this work is technical and detailed – teacher training needs to be modernised, recruitment and retention improved, workloads reduced, sixth forms made sustainable, the curriculum made better – and it can be left to the brilliant schools minister, Nick Gibb. The Education Secretary must look at the bigger picture, because there remains urgent work to be done: in one fifth of local authority districts, fewer than half the children have access to a good secondary school.

Anti-reformers say ministers should “stop obsessing about structures”. But structures matter: free schools, academies and school chains work. Free schools are more likely to be judged outstanding by Ofsted, they outperformed other schools at GCSE last year, and they are top of the “Progress 8” tables, the Government’s preferred measure of performance.

It is a mistake, however, to assume that opening free schools and turning existing schools into academies guarantees success. Making every school an academy – which was Morgan’s mistaken approach – would change little, because the freedoms enjoyed by free schools and academies are no more than an opportunity to do things better. To take the opportunity, you need social capital, in the form of good teachers, heads, governors and school sponsors.

These are easy to find in some parts of the country, but many communities have failing schools and limited social capital. In Knowsley, in Merseyside, there is no A-level provision anywhere in the borough.

Theresa May’s proposed reforms – to get private schools and universities to sponsor state schools, allow Roman Catholics to sponsor new schools, and, with conditions, allow new selective schools – were designed to increase the number of sponsors capable of running good state schools. Greening never dissented against these proposals internally, but word reached the newspapers that she opposed them and she stalled as far as she could.

Hinds will want to take his own view, but needs to address the challenge: how do we get good state schools in communities where there are none? He will have more than schools on his plate, however. He also needs to improve our terrible system of technical education, which is the main reason for poor productivity, our addiction to immigration, and stalling social mobility.

The Government is creating new technical qualifications – T-levels – but they have been delayed until September 2020. Ministers have proposed new institutes of technology, but they risk becoming rebadged further education colleges. There will be a national retraining scheme, but it must be ambitious to get ahead of the unemployment that will be caused by new technology. The apprenticeship levy is welcome, but there are problems with delivering apprenticeships and training.

Young people must be given better choices at 18. Right now, the incentives tell them to go to university. Many emerge with good degrees, but others come out with a costly qualification that makes little difference. On average, they will graduate with debts of £50,000, the highest in the world. Those who do not go to university – still more than half of young people – are neglected by a system guilty of institutionalised snobbery.

Greening blocked proposals to reduce tuition fees and refused to hold a proper review of tertiary education. Hinds must be brave enough to do that, to ensure universities are better, fees are lower, and young people get the technical or academic education that suits them. He is already touted as a potential future prime minister: if he gets this right, he will be a convincing candidate for the job.