Free schools and academies — state schools directly funded by the Department for Education and outside local authority control — have been one of the most distinctive elements of the Coalition’s education policy. Now David Cameron says that a Tory government would open another 500 free schools in the next five years, with 49 more this year, 25 of them in London. They would, like those already in existence, be set up at the initiative of local parents or institutions such as companies, universities and churches.
In some ways this would be a very good thing, expanding choice and the number of places. While some free schools have failed, the great majority, 70 per cent, have performed well, some very well. The jury is out on their effect on other schools but research from the Policy Exchange think-tank, based on a small sample, suggests that free schools can raise the game of low-performing schools in the same area — though not of those that are already doing well. Yet by bringing new thinking and collaboration into the schools system, they have added a useful galvanising element to the education mix.
What is important, however, is that free school sponsors should set them up in places where they are needed, not where provision is already good. This is important in London, where schools are not spread uniformly according to population across the capital. This is one reason why Labour wants to cancel the free school programme — on the basis that they divert money from providing places where they are most needed. This is not an insuperable argument against free schools. They can raise standards of teaching and attainment — but to do the most good for London, they need to be where the places are needed most.
Cruel cuts
The shadow chancellor, Ed Balls, has today delivered a new hair-raising warning about the scale and depth of cuts to public services if the Tories win the election. The cuts would, he says, amount to £70 billion, more than double the amount that the Prime Minister and Chancellor are admitting. The effect on non-protected services would be extreme, he says: the smallest police force since records began, the smallest army since Oliver Cromwell and a third of the people entitled to social care losing it.
Not all that scenario is so alarming. If police savings can be made regionally by services combining some operations, that does not necessarily mean worse policing. Similarly, if more councils joined forces in amalgamating some functions, staff numbers could be cut without damaging services. The important thing is not how much is spent but how well. Yet it is hard to see, for instance, how social care or rehabilitation programmes in prisons can be cut more without harm, while there is increasing disquiet over the effect of planned cuts on defence.
Mr Ball’s also raises questions as to how Labour would cut the deficit, as it says it will. So far, details have been patchy. The party has been vigorous in condemning Tory cuts but reticent about its own plans. We need a more balanced picture.
Choosing a candidate
The 12 days that the Labour Party is allowing its registered supporters to vote for the party’s mayoral candidate this year is six weeks less than affiliated trade union members will get. The intention of the US-style primary contest was to get voters involved: this time frame would undermine that. Ed Miliband should rethink.
