One of the jobs I have been getting on with over the summer is sorting out Walter’s school uniform, ready for him to start primary school in September.
It is terrifying how quickly children grow up. It seems like only yesterday that he was a baby; now we are buying his first uniform and preparing him for the classroom. Like every parent, I want him to receive an education that challenges him, builds his confidence and gives him the best possible start in life.
That is why I was so disappointed by the comments from the new Education Secretary, Lucy Powell.
She claims that Michael Gove’s emphasis on academic subjects created a “straitjacket” which repeatedly branded children as failures. Pointing to the one million young people now outside education, employment or training, she declared: “That’s not a coincidence—it’s a consequence. It’s his legacy.”
It is a punchy line, but it is also fundamentally wrong.
Michael Gove was never going to win a popularity contest among teaching unions. Nevertheless, the evidence shows that his reforms helped drive up standards.
The introduction of systematic phonics transformed the teaching of reading. A more rigorous, knowledge-rich curriculum restored substance to subjects that had been diluted. Academies and free schools gave strong leaders greater freedom to turn around underperforming schools. Expectations were raised, discipline was strengthened and disadvantaged children were no longer told that a demanding academic education was not for them.
Those improvements were reflected in England’s rise up the international education rankings, particularly in mathematics and reading. Michael Gove’s reforms were not a “straitjacket”; they were an engine of higher standards and greater opportunity.
Of course, we need excellent technical education, apprenticeships and vocational qualifications. Not every young person will follow the same route. But it is a false choice to suggest that practical skills can only be promoted by weakening academic education. As former Ofsted chief Amanda Spielman has argued, the European countries we admire for vocational education do not abandon science, history or languages at 14.
Lucy Powell should also stop using reforms introduced more than a decade ago as a convenient scapegoat for today’s worklessness. If she genuinely wants to understand why so many young people are not working, she should examine the welfare system Labour has allowed to spiral further out of control. It is becoming far too easy to write a young person off, put them on benefits and leave them at home indefinitely. That is not compassion. It is abandonment.
Young people struggling with anxiety or depression deserve proper healthcare and practical support. But for many, work is part of the answer: providing structure, confidence, purpose and human contact. The Government must stop paying young people to remain trapped at home and start helping them into work. It is a tough message, but often the right, and kindest one.
