Labour’s education dilemma

The Labour Party has a problem with education. On the one hand, it recognises that the academies programme which it inaugurated is very popular with parents. But on the other hand, it knows that the unions, upon which it depends financially, are opposed to reform. This creates tension where policy is concerned: how can the party satisfy voters and the unions?

This tension is embodied by the reform-minded shadow education secretary Stephen Twigg (a driving force behind the original adoption of academies), who appeared on Andrew Neil’s Sunday Politics earlier this morning. His words (and there were a lot of them) speak volumes about the party’s difficulty with the word ‘academy’. If you are a parent or union leader, and you can make sense of the following exchange, then I expect that Ed Miliband would very much like to hear from you:  


   
AN: If the academy model works, and it’s your party’s model, happened under your government, why should it be limited simply to failing schools, which is what you seem to be saying? Why not apply it to what your Downing Street one called ‘bog-standard comprehensives’?

ST: Well, I think that’s a very good point and I think one of the things we’re doing in our policy review is looking at the freedoms that schools should have.