What distinguishes a bill that is the dog's bollix from a bill that is the dog's breakfast? One word: repeal. We do know that the current Education Bill has proved resistant to the charms of the unreconstructed public sector professionals, the constituency of choice for all political parties. Neither the Liberal Democrats nor Labour find consumers exercising choice attractive, if it undermines the teaching unions. Cloaking interest under the bubblewrap of social justice, they have diluted this anaemic step towards reform.
The Conservatives have decided that they will support the Bill and put forward amendments to strengthen parental choice. Their support for trusts and competition between schools at least places them upon the right side of the debate. Labour is in a cleft stick. The BBC lovingly quotes from the research of Professor John Coldron of Sheffield Hallam, who undertook a survey in 2000, that appeared to demonstrate most parents gained the school of their choice. His research did conclude that they may have made rational choices for their children:
His research - conducted with the Office for National Statistics - found that 92% of parents did obtain a place for their child at their first choice school.
However, the figure for those who obtained a place at their most preferred school was 85%.
This suggests some parents were strategically selecting a school they felt their child had more chance of getting into, even though it was not the one they really wanted.
It also suggests that a proportionately small number of over-subscribed schools may lie at the heart of the current controversy over admissions and parental choice, since all parents are assigned their first choice school if it has available places.
Coldron argues that the reforms would worsen choice as schools could not rely upon the wise guidance of LEA planning and admissions policy. His telling quote nails his colours:
He said his previous research suggested that schools which run their own parental appeals conducted them less well than schools which receive guidance and support from either the local authority or a church diocese.
"This is symptomatic of what happens when you take schools out of their support structure.
"Most schools do appreciate the support of the local education authority.
"Schools need it, so they are not left to drift," he said.
The functional illiteracy fostered within our schools must be a mere byproduct of this wonderful system. Schools must not be allowed to "drift" or take independent decisions, as some might excel and start to educate their pupils. God forbid!