:00:29. > :00:38.Good evening. I am glad to see what you past the selected tests, not
:00:39. > :00:46.everybody could get in! You would imagine that the members of the
:00:47. > :00:51.panel, speaking, some going outside to jeer, calling them failures! We
:00:52. > :00:57.are always accused of doing that. It is done incessantly by the opponents
:00:58. > :01:01.of selection by ability. The principle of that debate, pretending
:01:02. > :01:09.we do not have selection already, by routes. That route... Different
:01:10. > :01:17.through the wealth of parents, enabling them to move to catchment
:01:18. > :01:24.areas, houses 20% higher in price than average. And, politely, perhaps
:01:25. > :01:30.pretending to her feet religion they do not believe in, gaining entry to
:01:31. > :01:37.schools that are comprehensive. This is a particular trek adopted by
:01:38. > :01:38.members of the radical left. Pretending to believe in
:01:39. > :01:49.comprehensive education, but actually believe, and the best
:01:50. > :01:55.example is the Roman school in London. Favoured by the Tony Blair
:01:56. > :02:01.family. As comprehensive as number ten Downing St an inner city
:02:02. > :02:11.terraced house. These points need to be made. If you study the activities
:02:12. > :02:17.of the radical left, one finds they either in boroughs of London,
:02:18. > :02:25.congregate becoming Roman Catholics. That is the solution to the problem.
:02:26. > :02:37.I am not here to supporting anybody Theresa May, and indeed I take the
:02:38. > :02:39.view that the Conservative Party has never taken up any cause that it
:02:40. > :02:57.does not betray in the end. We need at least 1500 extra grammar
:02:58. > :02:59.schools in England and I think the Scots could be a long, demanding
:03:00. > :03:16.about a new ones. The revulsion after the collapse of
:03:17. > :03:23.East Germany led to the creation and what had been the German democratic
:03:24. > :03:26.republic of new numbers of grammar schools, extremely successful. One
:03:27. > :03:33.of them I have visited. I had the pleasure of attending the English
:03:34. > :03:39.class, children and doctors educated side-by-side. Stand up higher than
:03:40. > :03:46.this country. That is my point. I am not actually in favour of grammar
:03:47. > :03:53.schools because they increased social mobility. I am in favour of
:03:54. > :04:03.them because they are good. Doing what education is posted. --
:04:04. > :04:08.supposed to do. Making sure that the talents of the children of this
:04:09. > :04:16.country, wherever they grow up, however rich, any of those things,
:04:17. > :04:21.the talents of those children put first, made the greatest possible
:04:22. > :04:26.use of. And brought to the absolute perfection by the education system.
:04:27. > :04:31.That is what I want to have. But before we get involved in the
:04:32. > :04:35.tedious debate about the problems of the tiny rump of grammar schools,
:04:36. > :04:44.almost all of them in wealthy areas... Some statistical analysis.
:04:45. > :04:53.The problem, sending children to these schools, most of the grammar
:04:54. > :04:56.schools in poor areas closed by Labour councils. I should point this
:04:57. > :05:03.out, I think it was incorrectly stated by the professional, closed
:05:04. > :05:10.by an Education Secretary who as far as I know was a member of the
:05:11. > :05:17.Conservative Party between 70-74. Closed more than any Labour
:05:18. > :05:28.government. Bipartisan closure. Statistics show the best
:05:29. > :05:37.comprehensives, for the children of the wealthy. 43$ of pupils, from the
:05:38. > :05:42.wealthiest 20%. A large premium on house prices in catchment areas.
:05:43. > :05:49.Huge numbers of children, twice as many. Travelling across local
:05:50. > :05:55.authority boundaries. The pressure on them, enormous. If you had the
:05:56. > :06:08.national system reasonably distributed that would be different.
:06:09. > :06:13.Statistics... Again, reports from 1954, 64.6% of pupils from working
:06:14. > :06:17.class homes. I do not think any of you could get a good comprehensive
:06:18. > :06:31.school that has anything approaching that now. This was confirmed, and
:06:32. > :06:40.was also found that apart from unschooled workers, the success of
:06:41. > :06:45.getting two good A levels in working class pupils, equal to the
:06:46. > :06:53.professional classes. Fantastically effective, getting children from
:06:54. > :06:58.poor, working class background to the realisition of talents. It also
:06:59. > :07:07.seems to be sad, and this really needs to be stated. Such a
:07:08. > :07:16.grievance. 1938-9, Private school pupils have 62% of places at
:07:17. > :07:23.university. 1958, after some years of grammar schools being free to
:07:24. > :07:31.everybody. Private school share, 53%. Falling to 45%. Falling so
:07:32. > :07:34.fast, it was said that public schools, if they survived, would
:07:35. > :07:52.have to educate and it is the greatest achievement
:07:53. > :07:57.of the socialism in this country, the century, to create and boost and
:07:58. > :08:05.strengthen private education. I just want to finish with one small thing.
:08:06. > :08:11.It is important I do. You would be sorry if I do not. I am going to
:08:12. > :08:20.read out what Eric James, our former headmaster said, when he was trying
:08:21. > :08:29.to defend grammar schools. If I were a high Tory Instead of a socialist,
:08:30. > :08:32.that barely exists, who really believes and privilege, one of the
:08:33. > :08:53.first things I would do would be to get rid of the grammar schools.
:08:54. > :09:13.This is the sort of made me a scenario, even when people are used
:09:14. > :09:21.to speaking. Half of you looking disappointed. You have got half an
:09:22. > :09:27.hour to write a speech. And you follow Peter. I am going to do my
:09:28. > :09:33.best. It has already been mentioned that tomorrow the Conservatives are
:09:34. > :09:38.publishing the manifesto. The selection, shaped about Brexit, but
:09:39. > :09:43.whatever they say about education and schools, it is as important for
:09:44. > :09:50.this country as the European question. We do not know what they
:09:51. > :09:56.are going to say but they are going to move the clock back. Once again,
:09:57. > :10:02.the Conservative dominated government if they win, reshaping
:10:03. > :10:06.the educational landscape. It is going to be a disaster. Moving us
:10:07. > :10:12.back to the system that has been tried and failed. It is not going to
:10:13. > :10:21.look the same as the period after 1945 but could be remarkably
:10:22. > :10:27.similar. The evidence, we heard it in the opening, excellent opening.
:10:28. > :10:40.All clear. I would question Peter's figures. We cannot get your surveys
:10:41. > :10:50.and question them. I don't this 64%. Anybody can Google that. We are both
:10:51. > :11:01.on Twitter. You said I was making that up. You have got millions of
:11:02. > :11:13.followers, I have got some devoted followers. Feminists. I'll take
:11:14. > :11:19.that. We know two things. The evidence from 45-60s. It was largely
:11:20. > :11:29.for the affluent, professional families. Yes, some working class
:11:30. > :11:32.young people. Lower middle class people. That narrative is so well
:11:33. > :11:41.known in society. And you knew, that is all that you hear about. But do
:11:42. > :11:49.we ever hear about the narrative of those sent to the secondary. We do
:11:50. > :11:57.not. I had interesting figures, between 45-76, 20 million plus
:11:58. > :12:03.children, told at the age of 11 they have failed. We can't talk about
:12:04. > :12:07.statistics, numbers, if I had more time to prepare I would have brought
:12:08. > :12:14.more. But we can talk about human beings, I have got two children, you
:12:15. > :12:19.make a joke about selection, meeting, but I think ten,
:12:20. > :12:25.11-year-olds, for particularly when they come from a background without
:12:26. > :12:28.no homes with books, confidence, to be told they are an educational
:12:29. > :12:39.failure before adolescence, it is a disaster. Parliament, I think. The
:12:40. > :12:49.honourable member for the Daily Mail wishes to speak. I am speaking. I
:12:50. > :12:55.think it is a disaster. We number of the post war period. If we look at
:12:56. > :13:01.Buckinghamshire, Kent, ten these have kept the same system that we
:13:02. > :13:07.had in the post-war period and we do not have enough about that either,
:13:08. > :13:12.systems cleaved down the middle, with social class. Buckinghamshire,
:13:13. > :13:19.also divided on ethical grounds. It is not a system for social cohesion,
:13:20. > :13:22.not a system for the progress of the majority. For the progress of the
:13:23. > :13:32.majority. Absolutely clear, when you have grammars, only 3% of children
:13:33. > :13:39.on free school music it to grammars, and private primaries. Yes, those do
:13:40. > :13:43.marginally better on the GCSE grades, than if he had gone to a
:13:44. > :13:46.good comprehensive. But looked at the impact of grammars, on the
:13:47. > :13:54.schools surrounding that. I got to retreat teachers, keep the morale of
:13:55. > :13:57.the school. You do not have those high achieving, highly motivated. It
:13:58. > :14:04.is just a completely different system. It does not since.
:14:05. > :14:30.It's about social background, subject to tutoring, in Birmingham
:14:31. > :14:35.parents paid for chosen to take the 11 plus, we don't know if they would
:14:36. > :14:39.succeed. It harms disadvantaged children and surrounding schools.
:14:40. > :14:45.And parents, even those who succeed, it creates a kind of anxiety around
:14:46. > :14:50.the whole process which, I think, is antithetical to education.
:14:51. > :14:53.Antithetical to human growth development on clause. Let's talk
:14:54. > :15:00.about education in those terms rather than, oh no, one minute,
:15:01. > :15:05.help! A footy debris two minute. -- I thought you gave me two minute. So
:15:06. > :15:10.what do we know? As our opening Speaker said, we know that Europe
:15:11. > :15:14.and beyond is moving towards a nonselective system and they are
:15:15. > :15:18.doing well. We talk about Finland. Finland has a system like ours, then
:15:19. > :15:23.moved conference of education, it is not of the league table. We also
:15:24. > :15:28.know it has provided opportunity for millions. This is about Oxford and
:15:29. > :15:31.Cambridge, and Peter proved that of the callow way it is claimed, the
:15:32. > :15:33.Paolo Dybala going to Oxford and Cambridge? The Tim Abraham a people
:15:34. > :15:42.are going to how many people are going on to
:15:43. > :15:50.learn and feel that their education is beginning and not that they felt
:15:51. > :15:56.that. The Conservative Party agrees with. Before Theresa May, two of
:15:57. > :16:00.them are advisers decided this was a good idea: Michael Gove and David
:16:01. > :16:03.Cameron on my people generally politically, they actually saw that
:16:04. > :16:07.the answer was good schools for all. I'm sorry to see that part of them
:16:08. > :16:13.go. We know it is better for social cohesion. Of course, comprehensive
:16:14. > :16:16.education is to be well funded, with good teachers and leadership, it
:16:17. > :16:21.needs a modern approach to the curriculum, and London is a good
:16:22. > :16:25.example of what is well supported, collaborative comprehensive candy. I
:16:26. > :16:33.expedition, fantastically important. This policy was written on the back
:16:34. > :16:36.of a cafe and void. Theresa May -- cafe Embolo. Theresa May is a
:16:37. > :16:42.stubborn woman and is holding onto it. Everyone is against it,
:16:43. > :16:47.including the head of education and UCL, every teaching unions head
:16:48. > :16:52.teachers around the country. No one wants it except Peter Hitchens,
:16:53. > :16:58.Theresa May... And I don't mean to be rude to the other speakers
:16:59. > :17:02.because they wanted to. I think this is a quick fix, instead of the hard
:17:03. > :17:06.slog that we need to make our schools good for everyone. I do not
:17:07. > :17:11.deny that it is a huge challenge. Please, please, don't support this
:17:12. > :17:24.and don't vote for a government that wants to bring it in.
:17:25. > :17:44.We've heard apparently that everyone hates grammar schools, but May is
:17:45. > :17:48.introducing grammar schools because she knows that actually really
:17:49. > :17:55.popular with parents. Why are they popular? The idea conjures up a
:17:56. > :17:59.image of children in need uniforms, working hard in a disciplined,
:18:00. > :18:05.organised environment. With the teacher as a figure of authority and
:18:06. > :18:11.respect. Interestingly, the biggest fans of grammar schools are ethnic
:18:12. > :18:14.minorities. At some 90% of pupils are drawn from ethnic Nazis.
:18:15. > :18:28.King at -- -- are drawn from ethnic minorities. The value discipline and
:18:29. > :18:32.aspiration. By not interested an ideological educational war. They
:18:33. > :18:37.want their chosen to succeed. It is clear they great success with
:18:38. > :18:42.grammar school. And not. Ransom. This debate is at -- not with
:18:43. > :18:48.comprehensive. This debate is about two different educational teaching
:18:49. > :18:53.method. I'm not a teacher, I'm not an educationalist. I did, however,
:18:54. > :19:01.write it think tank report on white black Caribbean and white
:19:02. > :19:04.working-class boys fail. I spent a year interviewing these boys, their
:19:05. > :19:06.parents, going into schools, talking to teachers and headteachers.
:19:07. > :19:21.Parents and children is talked about violent schools, and
:19:22. > :19:24.teaching methods that fail to teach the basic. Most boys are interviewed
:19:25. > :19:30.were barely literate. They are not alone. A third of boys on free
:19:31. > :19:39.school meals at the age of 14 have a reading age of below 11. According
:19:40. > :19:41.to the Guardian, 20% of the adult population is functionally
:19:42. > :19:49.illiterate and one third cannot add up to three figure numbers. How such
:19:50. > :19:52.a large proportion of our poorest pupils passed the 11 years of state
:19:53. > :19:58.education and still don't have the basics? The answer can be found in
:19:59. > :20:02.the progressive methods which have dominated our state schools for
:20:03. > :20:10.decades. An outlook which has run out this figure, -- announces
:20:11. > :20:14.bigger, and dismisses traditional teaching as futile, and refuses to
:20:15. > :20:17.challenge children with anything that might bore the more proved
:20:18. > :20:22.irrelevant. The parents I interviewed were bitter that they
:20:23. > :20:29.had no say on how their children were taught. They laid the blame for
:20:30. > :20:32.their children's poor education and squarely on the sort of ditzy
:20:33. > :20:36.methods which they complained about. Far from being the motor for social
:20:37. > :20:42.mobility as grammar schools have proved to be, our state school
:20:43. > :20:47.system pointed out one former head of Ofsted is entered entrenching
:20:48. > :20:53.deprivation and social immobility. Another described the attainment gap
:20:54. > :21:01.between people and secondary schools as, quote, and appalling injustice,
:21:02. > :21:05.and inexcusable waste of potential and an approach to us all. Why I
:21:06. > :21:13.believe traditional is better than progressive is simple. One works,
:21:14. > :21:20.the other does not. As I have seen with South London gang that I
:21:21. > :21:25.offended seven years ago LAUGHTER I know, it's unlikely but I did. When
:21:26. > :21:30.I first met these boys they were bright, they were ambitious, they
:21:31. > :21:36.really wanted to succeed. At 15, they wanted to join a golf club and
:21:37. > :21:38.live in the suburbs. The same ambition as most of our sons have.
:21:39. > :21:52.LAUGHTER But the really sad thing about this
:21:53. > :21:58.is no one made them sit down and apply themselves. It meant they
:21:59. > :22:04.never learned to turn a burst of enthusiasm into the day to day grind
:22:05. > :22:10.that bring success, as we know. That failing with a serious consequence
:22:11. > :22:14.for them and society. Barely able to read, they dropped out of school at
:22:15. > :22:20.14. As one said to me, you lot graduate from school to university,
:22:21. > :22:25.we go from school to prison. It actually does not have to be like
:22:26. > :22:30.that. I have visited charter schools in New York and a free school here
:22:31. > :22:35.in Brent, who proudly employ those traditional methods of education we
:22:36. > :22:41.associate with grammar schools. On poor inner-city children. In the
:22:42. > :22:46.free school, an 11-year-old Iranian boy told me he had learnt the whole
:22:47. > :22:52.of the ancient Mariner by heart. He began to recite it with gusto. He
:22:53. > :22:59.did not seem particularly academic to me, but learning that poem... Has
:23:00. > :23:06.taught him application, self-discipline and confidence.
:23:07. > :23:10.These are values people equate with the middle classes and grammar
:23:11. > :23:16.schools but they don't have to be. They can be learned from anyone,
:23:17. > :23:20.anywhere. But they need an educational establishment convinced
:23:21. > :23:24.of their importance. The tragedy is too many components are failing to
:23:25. > :23:30.teach him and for purely ideological reason. The argument against grammar
:23:31. > :23:34.schools is too many lose out for the future succeed. How is that any
:23:35. > :23:40.different from the present? Grammar schools are selected by intellectual
:23:41. > :23:44.ability, the top 500 performing a comp offensive, selected by those
:23:45. > :23:51.who can afford to pay for a house close to them as we were discussing.
:23:52. > :23:58.-- performing comprehensives. We have half as many peoples on free
:23:59. > :24:07.school meals as a Connor Randall, 9% of pupils are on free school meals
:24:08. > :24:10.in the top 500 comprehensive. Selection is alive and thriving in
:24:11. > :24:16.the state sector, by money rather than academic ability. I believe
:24:17. > :24:20.made's version of grammar schools is addressing a lot of the problems
:24:21. > :24:24.that people have of them. May said that she will force grammar school
:24:25. > :24:30.to dig a quota of children on free school meals, and allow late
:24:31. > :24:34.developers to take exams at 14 and 16. At least with her proposals,
:24:35. > :24:40.some bright children from a poor background might get a chance at a
:24:41. > :24:44.decent education. At the moment, too many gifted children are neglected
:24:45. > :24:49.by their schools or treated with suspicion for fear, as one teacher
:24:50. > :24:56.said, of being deleted. -- elitist. We're nearly there. People like
:24:57. > :25:03.grammar schools because they offer traditional forms of teaching, and
:25:04. > :25:13.these succeed when education progressive style fail. But as a
:25:14. > :25:22.poor kids harbour. There -- harbour. They can't employee tutors. There
:25:23. > :25:27.was are a good idea but an even better idea is if we make grammar
:25:28. > :25:30.schools work for everyone. That is if we take their traditional methods
:25:31. > :25:35.that have been so successful in grammar schools, and use them in all
:25:36. > :25:46.schools and in all abilities of children. That way, we could... Have
:25:47. > :25:56.one last line. That way we would make sure that all schools provided,
:25:57. > :26:01.as one child wrote on a notice board in Harlem, that education be a
:26:02. > :26:20.journey to one of the best lives out there.
:26:21. > :26:28.I've only know you the ten years and I got your name on. I have a speech
:26:29. > :26:34.written but my last Speaker made me so cross and angry that are now
:26:35. > :26:38.going to change my speech. What we got there was a right-wing rant
:26:39. > :26:43.about the standards of education in country, completely un-evidenced on
:26:44. > :26:47.evidence based on one or two free schools and charter schools add a
:26:48. > :26:58.few interviews with a black boy ten years ago. We got a rant. Now, now I
:26:59. > :27:01.and speaking now. We got a rant about poor standards, progressive
:27:02. > :27:11.education and we slating of the schools in our country. It is not
:27:12. > :27:31.true. Order. I need to make a point of order. I do not think speakers
:27:32. > :27:38.should... Thank you. Fair comment. I feel personally attacked by the
:27:39. > :27:42.betrayal of teachers and schools by the previous Speaker. I think it was
:27:43. > :27:48.disgraceful. What about the betrayal of young people? Educational
:27:49. > :27:54.standards are rising and compliance of schools would have a force for
:27:55. > :28:02.both rising of education standards. What those speakers have
:28:03. > :28:10.the few not the many. They said that grammar schools only force were
:28:11. > :28:16.working-class children to succeed. I know about this because my daughter
:28:17. > :28:21.was ten, we moved from Yorkshire to Kingston upon Thames. At getting her
:28:22. > :28:25.new school, aged ten, going to primary school in Kingston. We went
:28:26. > :28:31.to the school and came back. I was met by two other mothers, very nice,
:28:32. > :28:36.talking about school. They said, right, should be taking her 11 plus
:28:37. > :28:37.test in 10-month Mtime. These are the teachers and you've got to go
:28:38. > :28:56.and get a tutor for the test. If money is a problem, weekend a few
:28:57. > :29:03.her books, her work second hand. Needless to say, I refused the
:29:04. > :29:12.offer. Opponents of grammar schools know coaching is a problem. Grammar
:29:13. > :29:16.schools promoting social mobility. Devising tests that cannot be
:29:17. > :29:30.coached for. The fact that Buckinghamshire decided they have a
:29:31. > :29:33.new test, more susceptible to coaching, and Kent, last week, a
:29:34. > :29:42.report found the 11 test was a loaded dice. No evidence. No
:29:43. > :29:52.evidence that grammar schools provide... A route for poor children
:29:53. > :30:03.to get better life chances. The proportion, less than 3%. 7% of poor
:30:04. > :30:06.children achieve well, level five, but less than two and a half percent
:30:07. > :30:16.get to the grammar schools. It is not selection by ability, but the
:30:17. > :30:22.ability to pay. In Kent... Children from low income families, almost all
:30:23. > :30:33.educated in school, but the effects do not stop at the end of school. In
:30:34. > :30:37.Kent, the average hourly wage difference is ?4 between most and
:30:38. > :30:43.less. No evidence that grammar schools have been a vehicle for
:30:44. > :30:55.social mobility. Pitiful 0.3% of grammar schools pupills from post
:30:56. > :30:59.war class. It was a rapid increase, in changes from the labour market.
:31:00. > :31:05.The new welfare state needs more teachers, technicians nurses. And
:31:06. > :31:07.the two proponents of the grammar schools system have argued to
:31:08. > :31:15.selection the back door. Postcode lottery. Get your house in the right
:31:16. > :31:23.area. If they are serious about that, they should argue for the
:31:24. > :31:31.expansion of catchment areas, banding system, and returning the
:31:32. > :31:39.authority to force a level playing field. Theresa May wants to get
:31:40. > :31:45.around these objections, with a load of old welly. Accusing the grammar
:31:46. > :31:57.schools of dogma. Look in the mirror! She also seeks to sweeten
:31:58. > :32:02.the pill, by saying portions of poor children in grammar schools. And
:32:03. > :32:07.some in the party have said that is social engineering. If we really
:32:08. > :32:18.want to achieve social mobility, we should do one thing. Fight child
:32:19. > :32:26.poverty. So fewer pupils, already, are there, not arriving behind. At
:32:27. > :32:39.the age of 11, when the test is taken, it is a gap of almost 60%.
:32:40. > :32:41.Years of research have shown children do best in mixed intakes.
:32:42. > :32:51.Intakes, cultures. Different children do not make linear
:32:52. > :32:56.progress. Those fallen behind can transform. But the worst thing that
:32:57. > :33:01.any education system can do, tell a child, age 11, not one bit of a
:33:02. > :33:08.place at a prestigious school. And ambitions must be prescribed, on the
:33:09. > :33:13.failure of one day to pass at its. Those without the means to buy
:33:14. > :33:47.coaching. Jesus! Is it too late to respect the
:33:48. > :33:51.picket? As the excellent introduction made clear, grammar
:33:52. > :33:59.schools. In England are emphatically not vengeance of social mobility.
:34:00. > :34:06.Simply put, too few pupils from disadvantaged backgrounds attend
:34:07. > :34:12.grammar schools. But when disadvantaged pupils do attend
:34:13. > :34:14.grammar schools, a key fact, indisputable, ten percentage points
:34:15. > :34:24.higher than they would in the comprehensive system. High achieving
:34:25. > :34:26.pupils, age 11, GCSE, achieving ten percentage points higher than if
:34:27. > :34:32.they had stayed in the comprehensive system. We know that disadvantaged
:34:33. > :34:40.pupils are less likely to attend grammar schools. Those points
:34:41. > :34:45.already raised. Falling behind by 11. Less likely to be privately
:34:46. > :34:50.tutored. But that is not just an issue of equal access. One of the
:34:51. > :34:56.arguments, already being made, the negative effect of the two tier
:34:57. > :35:02.system. Privileges for the academic elite, abandoning the rest. And
:35:03. > :35:09.evidence to support this comes from the police where grammar schools
:35:10. > :35:15.operate. But crucially, selective areas... Buckinghamshire, Kent,
:35:16. > :35:24.Lincolnshire, do not represent the most areas. Deprived disadvantaged
:35:25. > :35:31.pupils make up our larger share. Disadvantaged pupils perform less
:35:32. > :35:35.well when a minority. This could be the case in those are from ancient
:35:36. > :35:40.counties, with or without grammar schools. I would argue against
:35:41. > :35:48.academic selection in places like Kent, Surrey. Not adding value. Not
:35:49. > :35:51.benefiting the middle class. The comprehensive system takes children
:35:52. > :35:57.of all abilities from a particular place. Educating them together in
:35:58. > :36:12.one school. That is the basic premise. One size, fits all
:36:13. > :36:17.approach. Evidently, we have some fundamental structural problems.
:36:18. > :36:24.Ongoing. Lasting many generations with the comprehensive system. It is
:36:25. > :36:30.grounded in place, the tendency to that two tier effect. Good schools
:36:31. > :36:36.in prosperous areas, bad schools, less prosperous areas. The bottom
:36:37. > :36:43.25% of the most deprived authorities. All of them have a
:36:44. > :36:51.comprehensive education system. Liverpool, Manchester, Bradford,
:36:52. > :37:03.Middlesbrough, Hull. All across the north. Sandwell. Nottinghamshire in
:37:04. > :37:08.the Midlands. Many have been failing for a long time. Long before
:37:09. > :37:13.austerity measures. Found despite significant investment from Labour.
:37:14. > :37:15.Also among the 20 places identified by the Sutton Trust as having high
:37:16. > :37:33.levels of missing talent. Pupils who score in the top 10%
:37:34. > :37:39.nationally at age 11. But not achieving GCSES. Simply go missing.
:37:40. > :37:48.London, as has been mentioned, the good educational success story.
:37:49. > :37:55.Other places can learn from. But one thing is different to other parts of
:37:56. > :38:03.the country, economically, socially, poverty. A family in temporary
:38:04. > :38:07.accommodation can live next door to a family that owned ?1 million
:38:08. > :38:14.house. And the children of those two families can attend the same school.
:38:15. > :38:19.This is not the social and economic mix found elsewhere. These debates,
:38:20. > :38:30.in favour of grammar schools, tend to be dominated by the Metropolitan,
:38:31. > :38:34.liberal elite. Tend to view the system through London's experience.
:38:35. > :38:42.If you take a trip to those places, it is different. Gains can be
:38:43. > :38:51.achieved, using the system we already have. Heart of the solution,
:38:52. > :38:56.fairer funding. The teaching premium to attract the best talent. But this
:38:57. > :39:02.is not sufficient to get the level of transformational change that is
:39:03. > :39:09.needed shop a new model required. The most disadvantaged areas need
:39:10. > :39:14.excellence to the average. Ever more the case, after the impact of
:39:15. > :39:27.Brexit, globalisation, the widening disparity of the economy. I have
:39:28. > :39:31.argued that grammar schools can play a vital role, as part of a system,
:39:32. > :39:37.transformation. Acting as a catalyst for long-term cultural change.
:39:38. > :39:42.Providing excellence, influencing practice at other institutions,
:39:43. > :39:49.secondary and primary. Across the different types of schools,
:39:50. > :40:00.academic, technical, creative. Not a one size fits all. Insuring parity
:40:01. > :40:06.of esteem. Not getting pupils to substandard secondaries, raising
:40:07. > :40:09.standards at every part of the system. But this would require an
:40:10. > :40:14.approach that ensure selection is not harmful. I have sympathy for
:40:15. > :40:24.some of the arguments against the damaging effects. Those being
:40:25. > :40:31.traumatised, thereafter. I want a form of academic selection in
:40:32. > :40:38.disadvantaged areas, not enough outstanding schools. And when
:40:39. > :40:41.attainment is consistently poor. This would require some sort of
:40:42. > :40:48.selection system, treating children according to reports. As originally
:40:49. > :40:59.conceived and supporting primary schools, for entrance exams, quota
:41:00. > :41:04.system for poor children, and transitioning later developing
:41:05. > :41:10.pupils at a later stage. Many, late developers. To sum up... Grammar
:41:11. > :41:20.schools can under a restricted set of circumstances, I am not part of
:41:21. > :41:24.the crazier side of the debate, but nevertheless I support some role for
:41:25. > :41:28.grammar schools. Can deliver real social value to working-class areas
:41:29. > :42:09.around the country. Thank you. Can everyone hear me? It is telling
:42:10. > :42:16.that in Peter's speech, almost all the 30s, 40s, 50s, 60s band East
:42:17. > :42:21.Germany. The world has moved on. The internet has been invented.
:42:22. > :42:30.Politicians, endorsed by grime artists. And some comprehensive
:42:31. > :42:37.schools helped poor kids become doctors, CEOs, Guardian columnist.
:42:38. > :42:47.It is offensive to argue this case, this debate, as if we were 45 years
:42:48. > :42:58.ago as opposed to today. I am going to sum up the logic of the case we
:42:59. > :43:05.heard from opponents. Basically, some parents rig the system for
:43:06. > :43:12.admissions. We should spend the state time and effort, tell more
:43:13. > :43:17.money, parents to play and rig the system. As opposed to an
:43:18. > :43:24.alternative, basically acknowledging that some parents game the system,
:43:25. > :43:27.but how about we take those millions, and help improve all of
:43:28. > :43:32.the schools so you do not have an incentive to try to game the system.
:43:33. > :43:39.That is a contrast between the two sides of the debate. I am good to
:43:40. > :43:42.ask three questions. All no. Grammar School is necessary to get a
:43:43. > :43:50.world-class system? We think not. Can we have grammar schools without
:43:51. > :43:53.significant cost. No. And do children have a fair short of
:43:54. > :44:03.winning this lottery? Simply, on our side. Our grammar schools necessary?
:44:04. > :44:08.Basically opponents portrayed the schools, with no discipline,
:44:09. > :44:13.teachers running abandon, kids waving knifes. Funnily enough, I do
:44:14. > :44:18.not remember that being the case. But more crucially, it ignores the
:44:19. > :44:23.context of education in this country. It has improved drastically
:44:24. > :44:27.in the last 20 years. Six out of ten students get the GCSE benchmark. 20
:44:28. > :44:32.years ago, it was one in five. Modest advantage children go to
:44:33. > :44:37.universities like this one computer 20 years ago.
:44:38. > :44:48.The idea that education is dire is awful. We need to do better, invest
:44:49. > :44:52.in teachers, invest in leadership, extracurricular activities, business
:44:53. > :44:55.links and between schools and the corporate world. Some might
:44:56. > :44:59.struggle. But the solution isn't to say to someone, you are struggling,
:45:00. > :45:04.I will send you to a grammar school. And they pulled we won't get to a
:45:05. > :45:07.grammar school on your criteria. The solution is to give them a mental or
:45:08. > :45:25.someone -- someone who can believe et al. I
:45:26. > :45:33.have a story about of Hackney -- a child from Hackney. He was good at
:45:34. > :45:41.debating and became part of the debating society. He is now going to
:45:42. > :45:49.UCL and his mentor is in the audience. That story is around the
:45:50. > :45:58.country. You can raise the ball's aspiration and universities in
:45:59. > :46:00.combines of course. Any have grammar schools without social cost? Begu
:46:01. > :46:10.Matt Machan you about Cox? They negatively affect
:46:11. > :46:19.schools in the area. More crucially, there is a signalling a affects you
:46:20. > :46:23.have when you say people you are a failure aged 11. Last week, a study
:46:24. > :46:28.showed that hits you don't get into grammar schools are less likely to
:46:29. > :46:33.apply to university, then equivalent kids in schools where there are no
:46:34. > :46:39.grammar school. It is not difficult to understand. If you have the label
:46:40. > :46:43.put on you at age 11 that the jobs the whole world cut off from you
:46:44. > :46:47.because you fall into a particular box, I'm sure it will have an effect
:46:48. > :46:52.on whether you think you should take your place in university or leading
:46:53. > :46:56.jobs in our country, or leading apprenticeship. What about
:46:57. > :46:59.employment? It's interesting that we have three speeches and didn't hear
:47:00. > :47:09.what would go on in secondary moderns. We teach kids in selective
:47:10. > :47:13.schools that you don't teach kids in secondaries moderns? In a globalised
:47:14. > :47:17.economy web jobs will be more automated, I worry about kids that
:47:18. > :47:20.won't get into grammar school. What if you don't well rounded, academic
:47:21. > :47:25.education in the schools with an selective? I answer the question. Do
:47:26. > :47:34.you know what, I'm going to say yes. I'm good. You mentioned secondary
:47:35. > :47:38.modern. In current exam performance, someone told me I made this up, it
:47:39. > :47:47.comes House of Commons briefing paper from this year. All right
:47:48. > :47:54.Peter. The percentages five or more including English and maths work for
:47:55. > :48:02.them. Secondary modern, 49%. Compliance is and private --
:48:03. > :48:10.comprehensives, 56.7%. Grammar schools, 96%. In 50 years, they have
:48:11. > :48:18.achieved a 7% automation in outcomes of children. Stop interrupting me.
:48:19. > :48:23.The general point is this. No one is denying that grammar schools do
:48:24. > :48:25.well, they have a negative effect on school dramas is no necessary
:48:26. > :48:29.condition having a world-class education system that you have
:48:30. > :48:33.grammar school. You get great results and also have a completely
:48:34. > :48:38.comprehensive system, like Canada. Before the world -- if the world was
:48:39. > :48:43.more like Canada, it would be a better place. My last point, do kids
:48:44. > :48:50.have a fair shot at getting ink is a ready answer is no. The last
:48:51. > :48:54.Speaker, why did the chief executive of one of the last companies fixing
:48:55. > :48:59.of the biggest companies for the stats, admit you can't have it you'd
:49:00. > :49:07.approved exam? Because he was one? It's his job. Parents are spilling
:49:08. > :49:10.thousands of pounds when there is a perception you have to spend
:49:11. > :49:17.thousands of pounds getting your kid into a grammar school, you drive
:49:18. > :49:23.parents into destitution because they think the game is rigged. And
:49:24. > :49:31.kids with special educational needs. They have not mentioned though. The
:49:32. > :49:37.one 1.8% of children in school. That qualify for special needs. I have a
:49:38. > :49:40.theory that those kids aren't going to get into grammar school. People
:49:41. > :49:43.in this audience with siblings or children or will have siblings and
:49:44. > :49:46.children who might have special needs. Ask yourself the question,
:49:47. > :49:55.will they benefit from this policy? I think not. Lewis, 15 seconds. Last
:49:56. > :49:59.point. Our country is divided. I don't think it's a good idea to
:50:00. > :50:02.entrench a policy with who literally divide communities and not just at
:50:03. > :50:12.school but beyond. Three questions, do we need grammar schools? And no.
:50:13. > :50:17.Andy grammar schools come with huge costs? They do. Do most children
:50:18. > :50:19.have a chance getting in Kosovo no. For all those reasons, vote for our
:50:20. > :50:23.side. Thank you.