Revealed: The three candidates for education committee chair

Two former shadow children’s ministers and a disability rights campaigner are vying to become chair of the Parliamentary education committee.

Labour MPs Sharon Hodgson, Dr Marie Tidball and Helen Hayes have been confirmed as the three nominees for the role. MPs will vote for their pick on Wednesday.

It means the education committee will have its first woman chair. 

The role of chair is a powerful one, as the holder sets the agenda for the committee, which has broad powers to compel ministers and civil servants to testify and provide information and data.

Chairships of committees are allocated proportionately based on the number of MPs a party has. 

The education committee was chaired by four Conservatives – Graham Stuart, Neil Carmichael, Robert Halfon and Robin Walker – between 2010 and this year, when Labour regained control after its election landslide.

MPs have to get at least 15 backers from their own party to be nominated, and can also add signatures from other MPs, which they often do to demonstrate cross-party support.

Here are the candidates…

Helen Hayes

Hayes has been the MP for Dulwich and West Norwood since 2015.

She was shadow minister for the cabinet office briefly in 2020, and became shadow children and early years minister in December 2021, serving until this year’s election.

However, she was not appointed to the education team when Labour won power.

Supporters (own party): Jim Dickson, Kim Leadbeater, Toby Perkins, Dawn Butler, Fleur Anderson, Bill Esterson, Florence Eshalomi, Mr Tanmanjeet Singh Dhesi, Luke Murphy, Tom Rutland, Jess Asato, Rachael Maskell, Claire Hazelgrove, Andy Slaughter, Alistair Strathern, Marsha De Cordova, Ms Polly Billington

Supporters (other parties or no party): Layla Moran, Jerome Mayhew, Kevin Hollinrake

Sharon Hodgson

An MP since 2005, Hodgson currently represents Washington and Gateshead South in the House of Commons.

She served as shadow children and families minister under Ed Miliband between 2010 and 2013, and then again under Jeremy Corbyn from 2015 to 2016.

When Labour were last in government, Hodgson served on the children, schools and families select committee, the then-name for the Department for Education.

Supporters (own party): Dame Diana Johnson, Andrew Gwynne, Mary Glindon, Mrs Emma Lewell-Buck, Melanie Onn, Emily Thornberry, Jo Platt, Josh Simons, Matthew Patrick, Valerie Vaz, Pamela Nash, Dame Siobhain McDonagh, David Smith, Sarah Champion, Uma Kumaran

Supporters (other parties or no party): Claire Hanna, Liz Saville Roberts, Jim Shannon

Dr Marie Tidball

Dr Marie Tidball was elected as the MP for Penistone and Stocksbridge in Yorkshire at the election in July, defeating Conservative Miriam Cates, one of the last committee’s most outspoken voices.

Tidball is disabled and is a prominent campaigner for disability rights. She studied law at Wadham College, Oxford before pursuing an MSc in criminology and criminal justice and later worked as a policy and legal officer at Autism West Midlands.

Supporters (own party): Lizzi Collinge, Jen Craft, Gill Furniss, Catherine Fookes, Mike Tapp, Jon Pearce, Paul Davies, Jack Abbott, Chris Bloore, Natalie Fleet, Shaun Davies, Dr Simon Opher, Steve Race, Anna Dixon, Mr Luke Charters

Supporters (other parties or no party): Adam Dance, Steve Darling

Government growth and skills policies should target career-changers

NFER’s latest research, funded by the Nuffield Foundation, says that over a million jobs could be lost from a set of ‘high-risk’ occupations in the next decade.

Labour’s manifesto promised new policies, like the Growth and Skills Levy and the creation of Skills England, to “provide pathways to good prospects for all”. Achieving this goal requires a focus on helping people get back into work quickly when they lose their jobs, by switching careers into growing occupations.

A changing labour market

Today’s workers are facing huge economic change, as highlighted in our latest paper. Our projections show that over one million jobs could be lost from declining occupations by 2035. This is driven by the adoption of technology and automation in the labour market, as well as longer-term trends in the economy.

Twelve million people work in the high-risk occupations that will see the bulk of these job losses. These include administrators, secretaries, retail workers, cleaners and hospitality workers. They tend to be lower-paid and less qualified.

Historically, workers who have changed jobs when in these high-risk occupations did not move too far. Over the past decade, 12 to 14 per cent of these workers changed jobs each year, but most moved to similar jobs.

However, given the number of jobs in these high-risk occupations will be declining over the next decade, many workers who are displaced may struggle to find a similar role. They may need to make a career change to get back into work.

The career-change challenge

Our analysis suggests people looking for new jobs in growing areas of the economy are likely to face two main options.

First, there are some growing occupations that are lower-paid, such as care work or customer service jobs. While some retraining is likely to be required for these jobs, many workers in high-risk occupations appear to have broadly similar essential employment skills* and level of qualifications needed to do these roles.

However, it is unlikely that there will be enough new jobs in these growth areas to absorb all the jobs lost from high-risk occupations.

Second, there are likely to be more opportunities in better-paid, professional or managerial occupations that require specific skills and qualifications. Examples include teaching or IT.

We project larger numbers of new jobs in these areas, but workers in the high-risk occupations do not tend to have the essential employment skills needed to do these jobs.

There is also a clear qualifications gap; people who have tended to make these moves have higher qualifications than others, suggesting adult and further education will be critical to them in achieving these moves.

The challenge is therefore a big one, but the evidence shows there is untapped potential out there. An earlier paper in our project shows that some workers in lower-skilled occupations have higher-level essential employment skills than they use in their current jobs.

The government, education providers, employers and career advisors should focus on ensuring people can recognise, describe and demonstrate those skills when applying for jobs.

Change is needed

Helping people realise their potential and stay in work by changing careers is vital for economic growth. While government will play an important role, a wider response is needed. That is why NFER is holding a roundtable to bring together stakeholders across the skills system and publish a recommended set of key actions later this year.

For now, the new government’s focus will be on Skills England and changes to the levy. There has been long-term decline in both state-funded and employer-funded training for workers in England. These new policies must be aimed at reversing that decline.

Doing so will help ensure that everyone who faces displacement from the labour market in future can get excellent training and overcome the career-change challenge.

* The essential employment skills are: communication, collaboration, problem-solving, organising work, creative thinking and information literacy. Analysis shows us that these skills are used most widely across the economy today and are set to grow in importance by 2035.

Team UK land in Lyon for WorldSkills

Spirits were high among Team UK after their first couple of pre-competition days in Lyon, France.

The 31 champions were particularly animated as they flew out to France over the weekend, landing safely in time for some sightseeing in the beautifully rainy city of Lyon before getting down to business.

This week, Team UK will be competing against hundreds of young professionals in 27 skills competitions across four gruelling days at WorldSkills.

Today, the talented young people headed down to the Eurexpo Lyon just outside of Lyon city centre, the massive exhibition centre showcasing all 62 skills, to familiarise themselves with their workshops.

Diligent and dedicated

Much of Team UK were ready and roaring to go as they flew over the channel.

But Kasia Gierek, a degree apprentice from Warrington and Team UK’s competitor in chemical laboratory technology, was deep into revising formulas during the flight to Lyon.

Gierek’s training schedule has been intense as she has only been training since February.

Unlike some of her fellow competitors who live far away from their training managers, Gierek luckily lives a short drive from her – Michael Hughes from the University of Manchester – so was able to meet him regularly.

A rest and relaxation day was on the cards the day after the team landed, which involved some sightseeing of Lyon, the so-called Manchester of France. The flip-flopping of sun to rain to heavy rainstorms in the last 24 hours confirmed the city’s informal nickname.

On Monday, Team UK were on site to engage in a familiarisation exercise, which involved getting to know the workshop and all its equipment they’d be using for the next four days.

FE Week spotted Dior Regan, the painting and decorating competitor from Lincoln College, close to the media centre. She arrived at the Eurexpo centre in the morning to test out the wall and materials she’d become very familiar with over the competition.

Over at the Robot Systems Integration workshop, Team UK’s duo champions Charlie Carson and Jason Scott from Northern Regional College were becoming familiar with their competition.

We noticed them handing out badges to competitors from other countries during familiarisation day.

Tomorrow is the opening ceremony. President Macron is expected to give a speech to the audience and Team UK will be proudly flying the flag during the parade of nations.

Follow @feweek on X/Twitter for live updates. You can tweet your support by using the hashtag #TeamUK.

WorldSkills 2028 host country revealed

The WorldSkills general assembly has officially confirmed Japan will host the 2028 competition.

The city of Aichi, Japan will host the 49th WorldSkills Competition in 2028 after a bid from Toronto, Canada was pulled at the last minute.

On the eve of the WorldSkills Lyon opening ceremony, the general assembly, WorldSkills International’s highest decision making body, voted in favour of Japan’s bid.

Watch Japan’s bid here.

WorldSkills Japan said that Aichi has been an international hub for industries such as automotive and aerospace.

In 2019, the city opened Aichi Sky Expo, one of the country’s largest exhibition centres and has already hosted Japan’s national skills competitions.

Japan have been part of WorldSkills since near its inception. It joined in 1961 while Canada joined as a member in 1990.

Japan won a total of 34 medals at the 2022 WorldSkills Special Edition, eight of which were gold, 5 silver, 5 bronze and 16 medallions of excellence.

Shortly after Aichi’s announcement to bid in April, WorldSkills Ontario lodged an offer to host the 49th competition in Toronto, Canada. The country dropped out late last week (September 6), the final working day before the General Assembly was due to convene.

Canada won seven medals in 2022, including one gold, two bronze and four medallions of excellence.

The next WorldSkills competition will be in Shanghai, China in 2026. The WorldSkills Shanghai delegation are expected to unveil a spectacular performance at this year’s closing ceremony on Sunday.

WorldSkills Lyon officially kicks off tomorrow as the country puts on its opening ceremony. Follow @feweek on Twitter for live updates. You can tweet your support by using the hashtag #TeamUK.

FE Week is the media partner of WorldSkills UK and Team UK.

How colleges can lead the way on truly inclusive workforce development

With the appointment of James Timpson as prisons minister, the government has made prison reform a top priority, with rehabilitation a central focus. This represents a challenge and an opportunity for colleges to be part of a moral as well as economic transformation. 

Every FE College can talk about local skills shortages. Great initiatives are in place across the sector to help tackle these, often in partnership with employers, with the dual aim of providing students with access to great employment and career opportunities. 

This includes Local Skills Improvement Plans, which aim to support job creation within a region, enabling businesses, and ultimately the economy, to thrive.

Along with other education providers, colleges have a central role in the development and delivery of such plans. FE institutions know and understand the needs of their communities well, giving everyone the chance to achieve their career goals, regardless of background, ability or previous education experience.

This is a unique position to be in. It gives colleges the opportunity to take a leading role within LSIPs (and other local partnerships) and increase the positive impact being delivered across our regions.

However, we know that if we are to genuinely achieve this greater impact, we need to think more innovatively about how to address the ever-increasing skills gaps. Crucially, we need to help our employer partners and stakeholders do the same.

So, we have accessed funding through Innovate UK to develop ways to encourage employers to think differently about their workforce development strategies. Our aim is to increase the talent pool for employers by giving opportunities to the people who find accessing employment the most challenging.

Challenging preconceptions is never easy, but the rewards can be immense

Our starting point has been to identify three of these ‘harder to reach’ groups: people with convictions (of which there are over 12 million in the UK), veterans and people with SEND, all of whom we know have the motivation to secure and sustain meaningful jobs.

Of these groups, returning citizens struggle the most to get back into the workforce. More than two-thirds (68 per cent) of people who are unemployed in Essex have convictions – equating to thousands of people.

Perhaps unsurprisingly, 75 per cent of employers will not hire someone with a conviction. And yet,  we know that nearly one-fifth of people leaving prison without a job quickly re-offend.

At a time when our region is struggling with skills shortages, particularly in construction, digital and health and social care, there surely has to be an understanding of the opportunity that lies here, in a moral and a practical sense.

Working with our local prison and probation service, we are already running training progammes for people with upcoming release dates. Our main challenge has been immediately clear though: changing the mindset of employers.

Of course, concerns around trust are valid, as are worries relating to the amount of time needed to support new members of staff. But these barriers can be overcome with support and awareness of the many benefits of workforce diversification.

These benefits can be significant. Research we have conducted with employers revealed that 92 per cent of inclusive employers say diverse recruitment has enhanced their reputation, helping them to win contracts and awards. According to the Social Value Portal, a company can generate over £24,000 in social value by hiring just one person with a conviction.

It is also essential that we understand the needs and interests of the people seeking employment. Being pigeonholed in a specific sector will not lead to meaningful and sustainable employment for anyone. 

Despite being in the early stages of this initiative, we are already making progress. Equipping people in prison with their CSCS cards, for example, immediately makes them more employable when they are released, benefiting the whole community.

Encouraging businesses to think differently about their workforce requires input from many different stakeholders, all sharing an ambition to improve people’s lives and those of the wider community. Challenging preconceptions is never easy, but the rewards can be immense.

Colleges can’t do this alone, but we can step up to influence, lead and support local skills partnerships to make a difference in people’s lives – as this is after all, what FE colleges are experts at.

The Staffroom: Don’t let a summer of anger turn into a winter of discontent

It has been a summer of anger.

Judging by the network groups I’m part of, college staff countrywide were enraged by their exclusion from the 5.5 per cent pay increase given to school teachers. Many saw it as an outright betrayal from the new Labour government.

Having been involved in the successful campaign to elect a Labour MP for Darlington, I felt compelled to reach out to Bridget Philipson. So I wrote two letters, one for the secretary of state and one for my local MP.

Two days later, they were on the University and College Union’s ‘New Deal for FE’ page as ready-to-go email templates for anyone to send in. It felt like we had a movement!

Then the riots started and focus went elsewhere.

I watched in horror as Teesside University’s library windows were smashed and its sports centre raided by some of those who had the most to gain had they chosen to enrol there instead.

Invariably, FE will play a vital role in repairing the social fabric torn by these events. But in truth what has been laid bare is nothing if not the festering societal wound caused by the underfunding of further education.

People of all ages across the country have been let down by education and government alike. Adrift and vulnerable, they are increasingly falling prey to the toxic influence of online disinformation and far-right ideologues.

The inadequacies of the system – overcrowded classes, under-resourced teachers, under-valued courses – create a breeding ground for discontent.

Our sector works with a purpose that defies our burden. From managers wrestling with ever-changing financial constraints to lecturers facing unsafe workloads to student support advisors donning myriad roles to extend lifelines to these students, staff sacrifice their own health and wellbeing to keep the show on the road.

But how long can they keep darning the social fabric before their own thread breaks?

We need a new deal for FE, and we need it urgently

During the election campaign, Keir Starmer spoke about the importance of colleges in providing the technical skills to power the country’s growth. The expectation: to finally be seen, funded and supported. The actuality: Silence and a cold shoulder.

For those asking why, the answer is simple: We need cold hard cash, and the conventional wisdom is that there isn’t any.

Perhaps, but cash takes many forms. For example, fairer funding streams and dedicated capital budgets would mean colleges weren’t forced to pay out huge amounts on payroll at the expense of equipment.

Another simple but impactful change: Make colleges VAT exempt. No one questions why FE, which typically serves the least affluent, has been paying VAT for years. And it’s in this context that we’ve had to watch this summer’s backlash against imposing VAT on private schools (which serve some of the UK’s most affluent). It is beyond irony. It is hypocrisy.

We need a new deal for FE, and we need it urgently.

Why shouldn’t we be paid commensurately with the vital job we have been given of upskilling the nation? And why should we accept that we are worth some £9,000 a year less than school teachers?

Why should we have to continue to administer GCSE English and maths resits that we know are failing our students? And why should we put up with only a short pause and review on the defunding of applied general qualifications when we have spoken out in one voice about its dangers?

Why should we put up with endemic ignorance of our sector among politicians and policy makers? And why should we continue to accept occasional distant platitudes from a dispatch box in lieu of genuine, collaborative development of solutions for the communities we serve?

In spite of a brief ray of hope in the lead-up to the general election in July, it’s been an overcast summer for this FE observer (with the occasional outburst). But there is still time – just – to offset a winter of discontent.

Bridget, if you are reading, come to Darlington College. Sit with us. Talk policy with those who deliver it. Champion our students. Show them and the world that they and their skills are needed. Because giving people purpose keeps them out of the hands of extremists.

That’s what FE does, but we can’t keep doing it with our hands tied behind our backs.

Scrapping resits is the wrong thing to do for learners

The tears have dried. The shock has faded. The photos of students jumping in glee are, if we’re honest, best forgotten. Everyone has moved on from GCSEs. Everyone, that is, except the thousands who will need to resit them.

So many of them fail that we shouldn’t put them through this, say the Association of Colleges and ASCL. They would like to see the policy scrapped. It’s well-meant, no doubt, but as a resit teacher, I dissent from their opinion. 

I sympathise with the view. After all, this year’s benchmark for GCSE English resits at 17+ is 20.9 per cent, against an overall English pass rate of 61.6 per cent. It seems to make sense to cut our losses. But it doesn’t.   

In our college in Stoke this year, our English resit pass rate was 63.3 per cent. Extrapolating, that is equivalent to a whole cohort pass rate of 80-85 per cent over two years. Include those who never resat at all and we’re still probably at around 75 per cent. That is ridiculously high.

It is also entirely predictable. We do it again and again, year after year. And this in a city which has perennially had a problem with pass rates. A population that’s been written off again and again. We do not think we are wrong in saying that our Stoke students consistently have the best English resit pass rates in the whole country.

Did our students want to resit English? No! Would they have opted to if they’d had a choice? Never. They did it because they had to. And now look at them.

Some have progressed onto level 3 courses. Others have moved on to degrees which would otherwise have been inaccessible to them. I would not want anyone to take that away from them. 

We should never leave our young people in their failure

We all know that there is a hidden curriculum behind what we teach. A while ago, resilience was the buzzword. Resilience. Tenacity. Determination. Character. Grit. Our students do not just walk away with a well-won qualification. They walk away with character. I’d swear they even walk away taller.

They come to us with crushed dreams, burning disappointment and bruised self-esteem, but they leave us knowing they are better than they were told. They walk away with far more than a pass mark. They leave with a life lesson: They failed once, yes, but then overcame.

And if that’s the lesson, then consider what future students will learn if we cut and run: it was too hard, so we walked away.

There are ways to raise aspirations and the resit pass rate. They aren’t magic or arcane; we simply give them our best. If you come and visit, I dare say you won’t be surprised by us or our students. But come back on results day and you will be as surprised as they are themselves. 
 
So we cannot take this chance away from them. By forcing them to resit, we might be delaying their progress. We might even be frustrating them. But we would do them a disservice by taking this opportunity to prove themselves away. Some people simply need more time.

We should never leave our young people in their failure. (And whatever you may say, they themselves will always call it a failure.) Surely we should teach them that they are more than an initial stumble?

So we will not be advocating writing students off and giving up on them. Why would we ever do that? Some of these students have been written off all their lives. We refuse to perpetuate that. 

We will show them who we know them to be. And we will keep on making them resit English. I know that most of them will pass, whatever they believe at the start. Because they always do. Our students are their own proof. 

Every single year, I see previously jaded and broken students leaving college like toddlers skipping from playgroup, bursting with joy and full of surprise. And that is worth the world. It’s certainly worth the work.

As a sector, we may not yet be delivering on the policy’s promise, but we deserve better than our representatives throwing the towel in on our behalf.

An evidenced case for reform of the maths functional skills qualification

Apprentices who have excelled in every other aspect of their training, demonstrated exceptional skill and proven their competence in their technical fields risk of losing everything simply because they struggle to pass a maths exam.

This is not just unfair; it’s a fundamental flaw in the apprenticeship system with profound consequences for apprentices and employers alike.

Members of the Fellowship of Inspection Nominees (FIN) witness this daily. They value maths and English as essential skills, so FIN is not seeking the removal of functional skills qualifications (FSQs) as an exit requirement of a successful apprenticeship programme

However, providers have reported that functional skills maths leads to unfunded training provision and poor retention rates.

Ofsted often highlights delivery and achievement of functional skills as an area for improvement at inspections, affecting learner progress and overall programme achievement. This not only drags down providers’ qualification achievement rates (QAR) by as much as 20 per cent, but also erodes confidence in the programme as a whole.

One particularly troubling trend is the increasing reluctance of employers to take on apprentices who do not already have a GCSE grade C or 4 in maths or English. This is a direct consequence of over-emphasis on passing FSQs, which many employers see as an unnecessary distraction from vocational training.

The content of functional skills maths is overly academic, often irrelevant to the roles apprentices are training for and, as a result, demotivates learners and frequently instils fear. The irony is palpable: a qualification meant to assess functional abilities is anything but functional.

The questions in the exams are often so complex that they resemble comprehension exercises more than maths assessments. For many learners of all ages, this unnecessary complexity turns the end of their apprenticeship into a nightmare.

Providers say that they end up ‘teaching to the test’, sapping any fun from learning. One FIN member has been coaching a deputy headteacher who has failed the maths test numerous times. Elsewhere, young apprentices have faced a question based around skirting boards when many don’t know what a skirting board is.

They drag down achievement and erode confidence in apprenticeships

Learners also face wellbeing challenges as a result of these tests, particularly stress and anxiety caused by the non-calculator section. In other words, a skills programme that is supposed to promote social mobility is instead reinforcing barriers.

In part frustrated by inspectors focusing only on FSQs, FIN members have submitted a series of recommendations for major reform to the government.

We want to see a radical overhaul of content, a change in the style of test questions and a review of assessment.

None of what FIN proposes should spook ministers who may be anxious about dumbing down. Instead, the submission includes practical examples of what needs to be addressed.

For example, the maths questions which carry the larger marks are often criticised for being too academic and for consuming too much test time. We have shown how a complex problem-solving question can be transformed into manageable steps.

Another important aspect of reform should be to review the syllabus to be more relevant for employers in different industries.

Changes could include a core syllabus and employer-led module approach appropriate to each sector. It could be project-based, asking the apprentice to produce work that is relevant to their industry.

For instance, we recognise that the water industry values the inclusion of algebra in level 2 maths while other employers seriously question its relevance. Why can’t we make both happy?

Furthermore, providers are picking up the tab for what 11 years of statutory education couldn’t deliver and expected to put this right in 12 months. They should not be penalised financially for supporting apprentices who need to retake their exams.

Ministers apparently want the emphasis to be on growth in the new Growth and Skills Levy after another academic year of flatlining starts in apprenticeships. They should recognise that functional skills is a misnomer, and that the qualification is doing more harm than good.

If we are serious about raising standards, improving achievement rates and supporting apprentices in their careers, then the requirement must be made truly functional.

DfE can’t afford to retreat into its Sanctuary (Buildings)

Hours after the general election result in July, something strange happened. The Department for Education posted an advert for half a dozen strategy jobs. It went viral, as far as DfE job adverts go. I saw it all over social media and had friends texting me about it: “I’m guessing Bridget has six mates at a loose end.”

But it was still very early in the honeymoon period and it was seen as a sign of hope. Bringing fresh blood into the department’s strategic thinking was surely a good idea, right?

Then in August, the same concerning detail emerged with every advert from junior policy posts to Skills England leadership recruitment: the jobs were open to London-based applicants.

Many may have missed the significance of that, but as part of its ‘levelling up’ agenda, the previous government had all but banned London recruitment, pushing civil service jobs into the regions.

I personally benefited. A provincial FE teacher would never have made it into a meaningful policy role before Covid and the great leveller of Microsoft Teams. Not without leaving the place he was doing it for.

To explain: meeting the bar for advertising a London DfE role externally required months of proving that no other option, whether internal managed move or transfer from another government department, would yield a suitable candidate.

For those first six shiny new posts to go live the day after the election, either someone senior within DfE went out on a limb or a new minister directly intervened.

I live in the south west, and our DfE regional office is in the most north-easterly bit of the map they could credibly push a pin into.

Now is not the time to retreat within the M25

My teaching career was defined by the wan, malnourished challenge among the green and golden beauty of rural and coastal communities. I learned so much from DfE colleagues in London, but I hope what I brought to the table was the experience of classrooms from Torquay to Taunton and of the working-class poverty we saw whipped into groundless hate and violence on frightening summer news clips.

Interviews with those committing bewildering acts showed something more terrifying than mindless thuggery. They had been too-easily manipulated.

Listening to clips, trying to understand, it was hard to escape the tragic ignorance on display. While it was heartening to see counter protests disavowing the notion that this racism and xenophobia represented their communities, it is an uncomfortable truth that our well-intentioned educational policies are not reaching all corners of England equally.

I worry that this is a reflection of a metropolitan-centric mindset that assumes what is working for poor children in the capital is the right approach for the Sunderlands, Lancasters and Weymouths of our nation.

“Poorer children in the south west have the worst educational outcomes in the country,” according to the South West Social Mobility Commission, with “pupils across the peninsula missing lessons at a higher rate than pupils anywhere else in the country.”  

Having said that, the north east beats us for the grim prize of “the highest numbers of children from long-term disadvantaged backgrounds” and the starkest disadvantage gap.

I was lucky enough to be awarded funding from the brilliant charity SHINE in the years before I joined the DfE, supporting an intervention for students in my college as well as other colleges nationally.

When SHINE moved from London to Leeds to focus on the north of England, I admit I felt a little left behind at the opposite end of the country. But damn, I admired them having the courage of their convictions.

It’s time for the department to show the same courage.

Let’s take those precious taxpayer pounds and bulletproof government jobs, and let’s move them to Plymouth, Hartlepool, and Blackpool. Let’s give their heroic frontline educators a direct line to shaping the intelligent and lived-experience policymaking we so badly need.

Now is not the time to retreat within the M25. There’s a whole country out here. Our diverse and difficult and delightful contexts need to be understood by those making decisions for our young people.