Dear Angela Rayner
Almost two months have now elapsed since you spoke as Shadow Secretary of State for Education at the Labour Party's annual conference. Our breath is bated to the nth degree as we wait to see what actually appears in your party's General Election manifesto and, having some thoughts on your address, I am accelerating the articulation of these as the word on the political street is that you may be a candidate for the top job of Party Leader as and when dearest Jeremy eventually bites the dust. If such a promotion does occur, please in the style of the late lamented [ by some of us anyway ] Tony Blair say ' Education ' at least three times when you are asked what politics is about and please mean it.
Meanwhile, as we plod along the corridors of influence that lie below stairs, can I say that I enjoyed your speech built, as it was, on the virtuous twin planks of clarity and passion. The whole Labour movement seems too preoccupied with abolishing everything in sight rather than refining and developing the structure so I gloss over your intentions to dispense with Ofsted and focus on independent education. You talked about the ' integration ' of those schools into the maintained sector and this seemed altogether more interesting and worthy of debate. A chord has been struck; there is a good deal of nodding in agreement on one side and no less shaking of the head in resolute defiance on the other. If you wanted to stir things up, you have been thoroughly successful.
As I mused on the merits of your speech, you sat down and that is when the problems began. Your thoughtworthy views on gradualist and staged integration, open ended in terms of final destination, were overwhelmed by the motion of the conference which spoke of ' redistribution ' [ ie abolition ] almost as a first step. The levellers were at the door and you seemed confused as to whether they should be invited in. On the Andrew Marr show a few days later you appeared to be an unquestioning squatter in the abolitionist camp; three days later you were photographed smiling in a jolly selfie with Charles Wheeler, Vice Chair of HMC, one of the leading independent school associations. This gave credence to your image as a robust co-operator but the abolitionists were quick to heap bile and venom upon you.
Of course you say that, once in office, you will hand the delicate legal issues over to the Justice Commission, involving at least delay for these are complex matters, and possibly a straight rejection. Then you will have nothing to show for your pains apart from pleading ' At least we tried ', a sentiment expressed by the Labour Party on many previous occasions, up to seventy years ago. Some will believe that you are actually relieved by such a turn of events. You and your colleagues will be well aware of the professed advantages of independent schools [ appreciated incidentally by myself ] and the arguments for leaving them alone [ a course not entirely favoured by myself ]. These are frequently and cogently rehearsed so I am not going to repeat them here, understanding that in the final analysis, according to your socialist creed, equality trumps [ please excuse the deployment of that unfortunate word ] all else, including the supposed imperative of choice. I will, however, underline how difficult abolition would be. It is often underestimated how many independent schools are not charitable trusts but proprietorially owned or run by commercial concerns. These might be much harder to price out of existence. They can be closed at a stroke by the education providers and the premises sold or used for other purposes. Some are even the private homes of the proprietors.
And what about hybrids? I grew up in a world of excellent Direct Grant schools and down the road from where I live now is Burford School, a highly regarded state school but offering boarding as an optional fee charged 'extra'. Perhaps such a model could be expanded rather than sacrificed on the altar of uniformity of the lowest common denominator? In South Parade, Oxford, you will find the ' Mathnasium ', a high street shop selling maths lessons to all ages and abilities. Will it be allowed to survive in the brave new world of no exceptions to the minimal norm. And what about Fred, the retired English teacher; is he to be barred from providing extra exam preparation support for free to his nephew and niece because his services are not available to the entire population of school students? Pandora has been putting all manner of interesting things in her box but the moment you say that education can be provided only in a registered maintained sector school, she will open her treasure trove which will transform into a can of the most tormenting and confusing worms imaginable.
And what's this business of restricting the proportion of independent school students who can go to university? Is that 7%, the proportion of the population at independent schools or 14%, the proportion of those at independent schools taking A levels or equivalent? And what about totally impoverished young people who find themselves at independent schools on bursaries; are they included? And those who are in independent education to GCSE then switch to state provision in the Sixth Form? And if you have abolished independent schools, you won't need these restrictions anyway. The universities might have something to say about it all.
I do apologise, I haven't introduced myself. My name is Mark Pyper and I have spent almost all my life living in, working in and generally being very happy in independent schools, most of them boarding establishments. You will know incidentally that the ghastly Eton image [ and much of the impetus for your changes came from the ' Abolish Eton ' movement ] of tail coats, flowers in their hair and the butler in the basement which may have a germ of truth about it. Eton is actually a good school but its reputation, its idiosyncratic trappings and the lifestyle adopted by some of its more celebrated alumni perform an unhelpfully negative service to the concept and practice of independent education as a whole. All of this image is a million miles away from the environment of the average and normal school in the independent sector; the rest of us just have to live with it. In any case I do have some understanding of what you might call ' real ' education, having been the Chair of the Education Committee of a secondary academy school in not so genteel Mansfield, Nottingham. I am currently Chair of an independent school in Gloucestershire and a state sponsored teacher training organisation [ a School Centred Initial Teacher Training ]. This means currently I spend more time being aware of what happens in the maintained, rather than the independent, sector. I see outstandingly talented and very highly committed teachers in both sectors; in both I see 'problem' and struggling students alongside those of high calibre. I see too many Heads in both sectors over keen to exclude the troubled and the troublesome.
When I ask maintained sector teachers for their views on independent schools, most will say they have better things to do. Some of course are in the unequivocally abolitionist fold; others may express a little personal envy as they glance across at smaller classes and [ sometimes ] the improved resources they see in independent schools. The vast majority may hanker after such advantages but entirely on behalf of their students, not themselves. They would not wish to destroy what Sally and Tom have, merely because Emma and Charlie can't have it. They are not preoccupied with equality at all costs; they would just like better facilities and provision for their own students. Ironically they would like their young charges to have a greater degree of choice, the very rallying cry championed by the staunch defenders of independent schools. I have some sympathy with this.
You will find something else, rather more subtle, to which I would say ' Hear, hear ' and which has a bearing on all of this. In the spring of this year your parliamentary colleague, David Lammy, was stridently critical of the investigative TV journalist, Satcey Dooley, for a part she played in a Children in Need appeal. This involved Stacey travelling to Africa, cradling a deprived and suffering small African child in her arms and asking for our money. Mr Lammy, you may remember, was strong in the opinion that, even if Ms Dooley was successful in raising a large sum, her actions and the presentation of them underlined an outdated stereotype based on white Europeans patronising, almost in a missionary context, the native African population. Some of us leapt to Stacey's defence as Mr Lammy's objections at first appeared churlish but then we reflected that he may have been right after all and that Africans looking the Europeans in the eye as equals may eventually be more important than a short term subsidy, however generous that might be.
What has this got to do with independent schools, do I hear you muttering? Well, quite a lot actually as these schools, made constantly conscious by elements of society of their ' privileged ' position are then required to salve their consciences and those of the community by doing ' good works ' in the locality and, in some cases, further afield. I think this is faulty on several levels. The expectation or requirement to do good separates charitable trust schools, to which the expectations apply, from those which are commercial concerns. Charitable status was conferred on schools in almost every case to provide education for those who needed it but could not afford it. Trust schools should be required to do this wholeheartedly but other charitable deeds should be a matter of voluntary, not enforced, action.The quid pro quo here of course is perhaps these schools don't then need or merit financial assistance from the state to conduct their business. I feel something rather leftish coming on.
Finally, the ' You are very privileged; you must do good deeds ' creates unnecessary chasms between these schools [ actually just the trust schools but interpreted as all independent schools ] and those in the maintained sector. Telling a 15 year old that he or she is privileged and must accordingly help those who are not, creates societal chasms and fissures which would not exist if we were just getting on with our own jobs. If you see someone sitting in a First Class railway compartment, you may be a trifle envious but you don't say to him or her, ' How fortunate and privileged you are. When you disembark, you must assist three elderly people by carrying their bags before you are allowed to leave the station. ' You just hope that they will behave in a generously spirited way whatever the circumstances.
If you are still reading this, congratulations on your powers of endurance and I will soon be coming to the point. And I need to, because I am conscious that incoming governments have a penchant for making a lot of noise about education with an initial blast of their legislative trumpet. Tony Blair, leading New Labour's o'er brimming with energy government in 1997, set out, as its first step, the undoing and termination of the system of supporting supposedly needy students at independent schools, known as the Assisted Places Scheme. In 2016 newly appointed Theresa May, strangely for one making a lot of noise about equality, proposed an increase in the number of Grammar Schools [ just before she hinted at an aspiration for the hunting of the fox ].
If you reach for your sledgehammer, or even if you refer to independent education as a monument that has to be obliterated, you will stir up angst, hatred and a mountain of unnecessary attention -- avoid it! It is your job to plot a route between the rock and the hard place:
The left wing said ' Let us abolish ';
We despise your upper crust polish. '
The posh boys replied
' I say; that's off-side;
Our great schools you'll never demolish '.
I am an unreformed, unashamed, middle of the road compromiser and trimmer. I believe there is no argument for wholesale reform and certainly no case for abolition but it may be time to readjust as we search for a middle way. ' A little learning ', someone once said, ' is a dangerous thing '. However a modest degree of integration of independent schools into the mainstream of education might well be of advantage to their students as well as providing benefit to the majority of young people.
If I were you [ much relief all round that I am not ], this is what I would do:
1 Forswear, eschew and generally avoid resolving practical matters solely on grounds of idealistic principle; perfect equality is no more obtainable in education than absolute choice. Put the two in opposition to each other and nothing will be achieved beyond a lot of shouting. Influence others in the belief that moral opinions must be subject to pragmatic moderation and compromise.
2 Encourage both sectors to undertake honest introspection as a path to identifying their weaknesses. On the maintained sector side ' Physician, heal thyself '; a grammar school is by definition a bastion of inequality and this dilemma must be resolved by your party. In Oxford, in the leafy middle-class lanes of Summertown there is a superb comprehensive school which, in terms of teaching, learning and outcomes matches any establishment. Less than two miles away, in the densely populated area of Blackbird Leys, you will find a school, facing huge challenges, struggling in every way. Where is the equality in that? Look at those leaving Primary School without the basic skills to lead fulfilling lives, both at their next school and in life.
And, Angela, tell the independent schools to look at the sometimes pervasive attitude of effortless superiority and the arrogance of entitlement and the absence of a sense of social responsibility. Draw attention to some outdated and unimaginative teaching methods; the insufficient attention paid to welfare and wellbeing until it is too late. There is much that can be improved.
3 Then urge each party to observe the strengths of the other. Let the maintained sector folk appreciate the range and influence of the broader curriculum in independent schools, the high level of student integration and acceptance of minorities in many schools; even the promotion of social engineering, where genders, ethnic origin and ability count for nowt and pass without comment.
And let the independent school people look hard and deep into the maintained sector where they will see strategies for coping with challenges that they wot not of; excellence achieved against the odds, success particularly with large classes; effective provision for students with the full range of disabilities; excellent strategies and policies to deal with staff wellbeing; see how the other 93% lives and appreciate the desirability of knowing them better.
4 To facilitate the aforegoing and to benefit from it, encourage and engineer as great a degree of coming together as possible. This is difficult when numbers are so lopsided but Heads visiting and staff communicating online are relatively straightforward; plan joint Inset and conferences; introduce ' visiting rights ' to each other's professional organisations; let schools of all types belong to national and international organisations; hold joint service projects and cultural activities [ debating, music, drama ]; joint endeavours on IT development; joint agricultural endeavours [ I have seen excellent farms in the Warriner School in Bloxham [ maintained sector ] and at Bedales in Petersfield [ independent ]. Encourage movement of students at secondary school level but not all in one direction: Independent schools may welcome children in care and classical Greek specialists, while they may contain square pegs who would benefit from increased room to breathe on the broad plains of the maintained sector. Experience without a sense of duty or hardship is the key.
5 Moving to the more practical and pragmatic, the items within your own grasp, if we are to make a move towards integration, we need one common inspectorate. It is nothing less than divisive and degrading that the independent schools do not come directly under the authority of Ofsted but have their own ISI [ Independent Schools Inspectorate ] even if it is eventually responsible to Ofsted. It is essential that all schools are recognised and treated in the same way as they are in Scotland where the writ of HMI holds good for all.
6 For as long as we have schools which are charitable trusts, let the Charity Commissioners have the structure and the teeth to regulate those aspects of the schools concerned properly. [ Again look at the role of the Regulator in Scotland ]. However, if my earlier advice is heeded and supervision is restricted to items in the statutes and the articles, they will eventually have less work to do.
7 Financial concessions [ relief of rates and on Corporation Tax ] are historical curiosities which have evolved over time but cannot justifiably be directly linked to the business of a school providing scholarships and bursaries to those in need rather than to the prosperity of the school for the majority of fee payers. These concessions should therefore be withdrawn and the funds thus accruing to government should preferably be spent on bolstering education in another context.
8 Tax relief on charitable donations and investments should continue where the proceeds go directly towards the funding of scholarships and bursaries but not where the objective is building work and the provision of resources; these are an aspect of normal business.
Already I hear the cries of those responsible for charitable trust schools that not only ae these measures unfair but they will drive up fees and serve to make schools more exclusive. I am not convinced by this argument as non charity schools thrive without these concessions. You just have to reduce your cost base a bit. With modern teaching facilities, classes can be slightly larger; the curriculum has burgeoned in recent years -- narrow it; and stop spending money unnecessarily on ever grander pleasure domes. That should do it.
9 We now move into the realms of VAT and that means for the first time in a financial sense we are talking about all independent schools, trusts and commercial concerns alike. From my earlier remarks you will know I disapprove of the imposition of VAT as a means of driving independent schools out of business. It is also true that most schools could not make effective savings to the tune of 20% of fee income. I would suggest independent schools paying the VAT at 20%, with the government separately making an allowance to schools as recognition for their educating their students outside the maintained sector (a) provided the school in question was performing satisfactorily in every way and (b) the grant paid in this way would never exceed 75% of the VAT sum paid. Thus a good school would effectively recoup 75% of its 20% and thus pay effectively a VAT amount of 5%, with the school having the added incentive to perform well.
10 With added traffic in persons, thinking, experience and money between the maintained and independent sectors, I sense a need to give some backbone at the highest level in individual schools through government, probably local but possibly national, being represented on the governing body or board of directors of all independent schools. This is society's way of keeping an eye on things while providing the schools with a different perspective and a new dimension.
So that's it. My view is that, while these ten measures may not be earth shattering or nation reforming, if implemented with energy and goodwill on all sides, they would constitute a substantial degree of integration and produce tangible benefits for both sectors, while providing potential benefits to many children and young people. The moves to Academy status and Free schools have already introduced a degree of independence into the state sector; the measures outlined above give independent schools the benefit of state influence; thus all schools eventually become maintained independent schools or independent maintained schools.
Some of my very good friends in independent schools will cry ' Traitor ' or ' Betrayal ' or many other Prime Ministerial pejoratives. It will be seen as the thin end of the wedge. I shall tell them that they are giving something to gain something and the advent of rugby did not mean the demise of football. They will still have independent control of the things that matter: ethos, curriculum and staffing. A multi-faceted educational structure can exist harmoniously and productively.
I hope you in turn might say the same to your colleagues, perched on the left wing and crying ' A sop; a palliative; we want whole hearted change '. Please remind them that we had a surfeit of that in the twentieth century on a national scale and it was found sadly wanting. We just need a hefty dose of all those ' co.. ' words that are bandied about in education: collaboration, cohesion and co-operation. With increased investment and a proper valuing of teachers, we can make school an even better, more productive and more influential experience.
Good luck on the next stage of your journey.
Mark Pyper
31st October 2019
