Sir Michael Barber - Chief Education Advisor, Pearson PLC HARDtalk

her murder. Those are the main stories. Now it

The United nations had hoped that by 2015 every child would be able

to go to primary school. But the last time they reported on progress

to that goal they said 69 million children were still not getting an

education, most of those in sub- Saharan Africa. Michael Barber has

advised governments around the world about education. He's now

working for the international company Pearson. It recently

announced it would invest millions in private schools for the world's

poorest families. Is that the right way to tackle the problem or could

it undermine what governments are How is this going to work? We are

going to invest in chains that are for the poorest families, to

provide education for their families. There is an even huge

increase in the numbers of children attending low-cost private schools.

Only 30% of children are now in public schools. You will find

similar numbers in cities in Africa. If governments are going to solve

the problem of education for families in the developing world,

we have to have the government Sissons improving and we have to

invest in the quality of private schools. At the moment the parents

are leaving public school to go to private school because many schools

are still of poor quality. 40% of choosing private schools and that

tows you about the quality of government schools. There's just

look first at home you are proposing to use this fund. $50

million is not a lot of money? will go a long way to get started.

There are lots of one school or two school of little companies and we

are going to find large chains of schools that a good high quality

but still below cost and much more reliable than the cover and private

sector. And they are going to be run by Pearson? Not just come

Pearson. You talk about a private school in places like Africa and

one presumes this is going to be for the middle-classes and this

really cannot be for the millions of children who are struggling to

go to to Keyston who are those from families on less than $1 a day?

the contrary. These are schools for the very poor people. We are

talking about at the lowest level, $4 a month at the highest level,

$10 a month. So you are saying a private school, and to pay for it,

a tart would pay $3 a month? That is the lowest end of the spectrum,

yes. If you think of it as a day's wages for a labourer, for one

month's School in, this is low cost education. This is not Pearson

building this sector, it has created itself over the past 15

years. They have had a huge increase in parents choosing a --

low-cost education. The higher cost of private schools the more likely

that there will be public schools in the area. This is parents voting

with their feet and they know the world is changing and they can only

succeed if the children get a good education for the future. It is

still a significant amount of money. Even if you look at it like, if you

can do it and can you get the quality, when you are earning only

a dollar a day? First of all government schools are often

officially free, for charges of textbooks and other hidden costs,

some Soames when you add those up they come to up to 80% of a place

in the low-cost private school. That is a factor to take into

account. Also, most people across the developed world and people in

the middle class have a choice where they send their children to

school. It is patronising to say to the poor people you only have once

was, the governments cool, and if it is no good... Are before we get

on to the arguments. Are there hidden has cost in the schools?

Books? The first investment we have made is in Ghana, and there are no

hidden costs. The children pay day. They walk into the school with a

wristband. That is based on consultation with the parents in

the area, rather than paying out a lump sum coarsely. They would

rather pay a small amount every day. This includes a meal and books and

everything. I may have got for something wrong but they get two

days a year. If they cannot pay one day a week it is not a problem.

Pearson, this is about making money? For Pearson, this is about

demonstrating that full profit education can provide higher

quality at lower cost to poor people across the developing world.

It is absolute before profit. important to demonstrate profit

because we want other investors to come in. It is not a huge part, as

you mentioned. It is a small amount of money but we want to demonstrate

that profit education can work in the developing world figures we see

a huge need and when you ask parents what they want they say

they want a good quality education and in government schools they

often see a poor education. As soon as they get some extra money they

choose to pay for it. So you need to show that full coffered works?

For Pearson, that will go back to shareholders denied the Prophet

will be made by the school's -- the profit. So you do not get some sort

of return from that direct return? We are not doing any training in

the short-term, we want to do mischief the full profit and

education. I just want to nail down have this Asali works so people can

understand. You put this money in it expecting some point in the

future you will get a capital gain from this over the future because

you will sell it on to another investor? Maybe in ten years' time,

it will go back to the owners of the school. Who knows. But you are

not expecting some dividend? We are not trying to get a monthly return

on the land. His part of the deal that they should buy Pearson items?

The Pearson is a huge global enterprise. And there is no quid

pro quo that you expect something in return? No. If that is what the

school wants to do they can do that but we are not going to make that

demand. OK. To get to the... You make the Pyongyang it is

patronising to suggest it is the poorest in the world who should not

have these first -- point. There is an argument that what you are doing

and demise a government system. The head of the citizen at Save the

Children says it diverts attention away from the problem is even if

you have this sector as a low-cost it is not doing anything to address

the more fundamental problem and that is that you could be driving

down costs. Many people, governs the cells, aid agencies, the people

who do lots of work, all of these people investing and that is right.

Pearson words for governments all over the world. How are you

undermine what they are doing? have worked for government. It is a

huge part of solving the edge case of chances of a citizen in the

developing world. -- education. -- education. And we have to improve

government systems. That is good but there is lots of investment

there. The low-cost private sector it is undoubtedly part of the

solution. Remember what I said - 70% of the chosen in Delhi are in a

low-cost private schools. Even if you make the public sector perfect

and it is a long way from that there was will be pounds to one

CT's low-cost private so we are investing in that. We are in favour

of people investing in that. Just the low-cost private schools are

cheaper per person than the government system. Before we look

at that and the quality, ideally, would the state be providing

education it would they be providing that for free? In an

ideal world I would like the government to provide free

education for everybody but also I would like somebody to be able to

choose and on a school with the option of choice. I know you do not

like a false dichotomy but what you are actually doing is trying to

prove that an expanded market have been profit education and there

will be some, there are people who say and suggest that what are you

try to do? You are getting to the point way you are going to

effectively control litigation and a government will say let's

contracted out -- education. Maybe they will be contracting out the

citizen to non profit organisations but the most important thing is

that governors, instead of saying all they have to do is fix the

government sector, they should ask the question, how do we get all of

the children a good it isn't as fast as possible? We are going to

have 9 billion people on the 19 planet in 2050. This will only be

done if we get an improved education system. If you work to

win the argument, people need to know the intentions of Pearson. An

influential American commentator says sees opposes the idea is to

get the system up and running and then get the governors to foot the

bill. -- the government. This implies there is a global

domination. Education around the world is a huge enterprise. More

and more money is going in and I think governments for the for

fierce all future should be the major provider of education. -- the

foreseeable. I work with governments all the time to help

them in improving their tickets in systems and I am in favour of

governance but there are many parents across the developing world

who cannot get the good education they need and are choosing a low-

cost private schools. If we invest in some of those changes we can

demonstrate that you can get high quality, consistent, good education

as a low cost. That is what we want to demonstrate. It is one part of

the solicitor in developing countries. -- the solution.

person says there must be some questions raised about the

ideological concern that is provided. What kind of teachers

will be hired for the school's? Will they be teachers or computer

monitors? Could they also equally the teachers with different agendas.

How can you ensure the quality? you are providing a suitcase and in

any country, there are some regulatory obligations -- education.

Pearson or any other provider, and we are in a minority stake, any

provider needs to work with in a regulatory framework. The

curriculum will be set by the country they are in and the

teachers will be good young people who are going to turn up and do a

good job. In Bangladesh, there is a wonderful n g o which you may have

heard of, a fantastic organisation, which runs 30,000 primary schools.

They are not for profit but they outside of the government sector.

The people they recruit a genuinely young women from their local

community who have a good secondary education, who are reliable and

turn up every day, trained well, get mentored well and do a

fantastic job. If you go to those caused you will see the children

happy and learning. If he did to his school that his government in

the same area you will not see that. But the idea is that if you do not

have a government, the example you have cited is a not-for-profit

organisation. You are a former Labour candidate. Here you are,

arguing and saying that we have to show that for profit works. A

comfortable are you with that? You know that people will be suspicious

that he may be just about to make some money. I am comfortable with

this. The burning passion for me and for Pearson is that there is a

burning issue right now of millions of certain around the world who are

not getting the education they need. They need it now, not in ten years'

time. If you look at youth and farmed in places like Pakistan,

North Africa, this is a huge social issue that is very urgent. I hope

we will work with governments to improve their systems but in the

meantime we have millions of parents across India, Pakistan,

rock abaca, choosing low-cost private schools. What is wrong with

the investment to improve and get consistency and scare and get what

the parents want? They know it is important. We are going to help the

parents get that. Or what if you do not get it right? If you are in the

investor... I did not be from that I am wandering about the millions

who don't get an education. Let's get back and take that broad

question. Take climate change, the future of the economy, War and

Peace, the distribution of wealth around the planet. All of these

things are huge problems. Take conflict. Take the risk of nuclear

weapons and all those other things getting into the wrong hands. All

the problems we know about. I'm not saying education can solve those,

but I am saying this. Education is a key part to the solution. Unless,

as a global community, we really improve the quality of education,

we have very big problems ahead. I'm pleased we're making progress.

I hope we get close. Can we meet them? We're too were three years

away. I think it will be a push but everybody should get behind them.

It is global with the right will in the right countries. And the

private secretary is part of that solution? A cause. Take the work I

had been doing with the minister in Punjab in Pakistan. His in Roman

drive has been focused on, not can I get these children out of

governments caused him to those close calls, it is, let's get

children who are out of schools, into schools. -- enrolment drive.

We have thought about peace and being, well, it describes itself as

the world's leading learning -- Learning Company. It provides

training, funding for schools. It also have an opportunity, with the

dramatic reforms going on in the British scoring system, to actually

run schools. It could set up a free school. Would pierce and be

interested? I just want to make this point. There are 7 billion

people in on the earth now. It is growing. The demands of the labour

market is such that each of those people need to learn more and

better than ever before to succeed as a citizen in the fast-moving

world. The demand for education is going to be vast out there. Tears

and will be part of that. They are beat people we want to serve. --

Pearson. One of the things we're obsessed with is not just where

that our products satisfied consumers, it is whether they

achieved outcomes. That is part of my job. Just to come to the British

example, massive changes going on, with these three schools set up one

year ago is based on a Swedish model. The idea is that a score is

free of constraints typically that have been on it, but still funded

by the state. In one sense I can see you, given your history, as

someone being interested in that idea. Right. Just to make this

clear for viewers, I was a big part of the Tony Blair administration

of's education reforms. We have had a 20-year trend towards the

devolution of resources, autonomy to score level. That is a good

thing. The growth of the academies which are a bit like charter

schools and now the free schools where individuals can come into the

system's that is good. For Pearson specifically, the regulatory does

not allow for the private sector to set up pre-schools. And it does not

a priority for us. You have pointed out the regulatory framework, but

the Swedish model does. There is an expectation that it may be a matter

of time. Is that right? Is there an inevitability that three schools

will be able to be run for profit? I don't think it is remotely

evitable. There is one freeze call we have been supporting. -- free

this call. -- school. I personally have been argued in favour of this

back when I was in the Tony Blair administration. I am in favour of

it. I didn't win the argument inside. You didn't win. Was it the

unions? Tony Blair? You were his education guru. It would have been

a big battle in the Labour Party obviously. But my argument is this.

Your job as a government is to get children a good education as fast

as possible. I was arguing, where you have poorly performing schools,

finding ways to replace them. was the point of academies. And the

academies did that. For Pearson, it is not a priority, this is not

something we are urging government to do. Wearing dialogue with

government about a range of things but this is not a priority. But you

would like to see it move towards profit? A I have always thought

that should be an option, particularly for replacing failing

schools. That is what I have argued in the past. The jury is still out

on academies, because of the various ways of testing. As it is

on three schools. Clearly the jury is out on freeze caused because the

first one just finished the academic year. Some of those are

very experimental. The jury is still out on a free schools. But

the idea you can set up a school if you have a good idea and there is

some parental demand, seems to be extending Choice, giving parents

the opportunity. It seems very sensible. I am curious about this.

When people look at the record of tartar scores in the United States,

or in Sweden, it is still not school they are successful. --

charter. It belly round some academies are undoubtedly

outperforming the rest of the system. -- the early round. A par

les? When you look at the data you get different arguments. -- are

they. We will see the A-levels in August. I want to say another thing.

I have looked at data on charter schools in the US. If you have a

general answer, our charter schools outperforming all public schools?

You're not going to find that answer. The policy on its own is

not the answer. What is the Academy doing? How do they work? You need

to translate that around. The good chains are undoubtedly having

better results. The United Learning Trust. Ark. The Harrods group in

South London. These are excellent groups. -- Harris. If you go to

Hackney, which is where I have lived for much of the 30 years, it

used to be known as the worst education system in England. Back

in 1995 I was involved in the closure of Hackney Downs school.

Now it outperforms many other schools. The EU find yourself in a

strange situation of telling the Conservative education secretary to

go for it, to push further? -- do you find. When I look back on the

Tony Blair administration, and if I think you asked Tony Blair, he

would give the same answer was up I don't think we went fast enough. We

should have gone further. I cannot impress enough on you how much I

think it is important that we improve the quality of education,

not just here, but around the world. I think we could have gone further.

We could have gone faster. Is it unions and their vested interests

holding the country back? There unions all around the world and

they take varying positions. I don't want to sweep them away in a

broad brush. But we need people in our systems used see the importance

of improving the quality of education rapidly to give young

people the best chance they can have in life. Obviously in any

large system there are people afraid of change we defend the

status quo, and who find change difficult. I guess it happens in