:00:01. > :00:06.pay substantial fines for making false submissions about LIBOR. A
:00:06. > :00:12.Barclays spokesman said the company would study the report. Now on BBC
:00:12. > :00:21.News it is time for HARDtalk. The United Nations had hoped that
:00:21. > :00:25.by 2015 every child would be able to go to primary school. But the
:00:25. > :00:28.last time they reported on progress to that goal they said 69 million
:00:28. > :00:31.children were still not getting an education, most of those in sub-
:00:31. > :00:33.Saharan Africa. Michael Barber has advised governments around the
:00:33. > :00:38.world about education. He's now working for the international
:00:38. > :00:44.company Pearson. It recently announced it would invest millions
:00:44. > :00:47.in private schools for the world's poorest families. Is that the right
:00:47. > :00:57.way to tackle the problem or could it undermine what governments are
:00:57. > :01:19.
:01:19. > :01:29.trying to do? Welcome. Thank you. This has been
:01:29. > :01:30.
:01:30. > :01:40.called the affordable learning fun, how easy-going to work? -- how is
:01:40. > :01:40.
:01:40. > :01:43.this going to work? We are going to invest in chains that are for the
:01:43. > :01:46.poorest families, to provide education for their families. There
:01:46. > :01:49.is a huge increase in the numbers of children attending low-cost
:01:49. > :01:57.private schools. In Dehli, only 30% of children are now in public
:01:57. > :02:05.schools. You will find similar numbers in Lahore and in cities in
:02:05. > :02:08.Africa. If governments are going to solve the problem of education for
:02:08. > :02:11.families in the developing world, we have to have the government
:02:12. > :02:16.system improving and we have to invest in the quality of private
:02:16. > :02:21.schools. At the moment, the parents are leaving the public schools to
:02:21. > :02:24.go to private schools because many schools are still of poor quality.
:02:24. > :02:28.70% are choosing private schools and that shows you the quality of
:02:28. > :02:33.government schools. Let's just look first at how you are proposing to
:02:33. > :02:41.use this fund. $50 million is not a lot of money? It will go a long way
:02:41. > :02:45.to get started. There are lots of one-school or two-school, little
:02:45. > :02:49.companies and we are going to find large chains of schools that are of
:02:49. > :02:52.high quality but still low cost and much more reliable than the current
:02:53. > :03:00.private sector. And they are going to be run by Pearson? Not just by
:03:00. > :03:04.Pearson. We will be a minority shareholder. You talk about a
:03:04. > :03:07.private school in places like Africa and one presumes this is
:03:07. > :03:13.going to be for the middle-classes and this really cannot be for the
:03:13. > :03:21.millions of children from families on less than $1 a day? On the
:03:21. > :03:24.contrary. These are schools for the very poor people. We are talking
:03:24. > :03:31.about at the lowest level, $4 a month, and at the highest level,
:03:31. > :03:40.$10 a month. So you are saying for a private school, a child would pay
:03:40. > :03:44.$3 a month? That is the lowest end of the spectrum, yes. If you think
:03:44. > :03:47.of it as a day's wages for a labourer, for one month's schooling,
:03:47. > :03:52.this is low-cost education. This is not Pearson building this sector,
:03:52. > :04:02.it has created itself over the past 15 years. There has been a huge
:04:02. > :04:07.
:04:07. > :04:10.increase in parents choosing low- cost education. The higher cost of
:04:10. > :04:20.private schools the more likely that there will be public schools
:04:20. > :04:21.
:04:21. > :04:30.in the area. It is still a significant amount of money, yes.
:04:30. > :04:37.When you are earning $1 a day... Although government schools are
:04:37. > :04:45.officially free, they charge for uniforms, textbooks... They can
:04:45. > :04:52.come to 70% of the cost. That is something to take into account.
:04:52. > :04:57.Most people in the developed world have a choice. It is very
:04:57. > :05:04.patronising to say to the poor people, you only have one choice.
:05:05. > :05:14.It is this government school. there hidden costs in the schools
:05:15. > :05:29.
:05:30. > :05:33.you are investing in? The first investment we have made is in Ghana,
:05:33. > :05:37.and there are no hidden costs. The children pay each day. They walk
:05:37. > :05:40.into the school with a wristband. That is based on consultation with
:05:40. > :05:43.the parents in the area - rather than paying out a lump sum
:05:43. > :05:47.quarterly, they would rather pay a small amount every day. This
:05:47. > :05:51.includes a meal and books and everything. If they cannot pay one
:05:51. > :05:55.day a week it is not a problem. Pearson, this is about making
:05:55. > :05:58.money? For Pearson, this is about demonstrating that for-profit
:05:58. > :06:04.education can provide higher quality at lower cost to poor
:06:04. > :06:07.people across the developing world. It is absolutely for-profit. It is
:06:07. > :06:12.important to demonstrate profit because we want other investors to
:06:12. > :06:15.come in. It is not a huge part, as you mentioned. It is a small amount
:06:15. > :06:22.of money but we want to demonstrate that profit education can work in
:06:22. > :06:26.the developing world. We see a huge need and when you ask parents what
:06:26. > :06:29.they want they say they want good quality education and in government
:06:29. > :06:34.schools they often see a poor education. As soon as they get some
:06:34. > :06:39.extra money they choose to pay for it. So you need to show that for
:06:39. > :06:45.profit works? For Pearson, that will go back to shareholders.
:06:45. > :06:55.profit will be made by the schools. So you do not get some sort of
:06:55. > :06:56.
:06:56. > :07:00.return from that direct return? are not doing any return in the
:07:00. > :07:07.short-term, we want the full profit in the education. I just want to
:07:07. > :07:11.nail down how this works so people can understand. You put this money
:07:11. > :07:14.in, expecting at some point in the future you will get capital gain
:07:14. > :07:18.from this over the future because you will sell it on to another
:07:18. > :07:22.investor? Maybe in ten years' time, it will go back to the owners of
:07:22. > :07:26.the school. Who knows. But you are not expecting some dividend? We are
:07:26. > :07:36.not trying to get a monthly return on it. Is part of the deal that
:07:36. > :07:38.
:07:38. > :07:44.they should buy Pearson items? Pearson is a huge global enterprise.
:07:44. > :07:49.And there is no quid pro quo that you expect something in return? No.
:07:49. > :07:55.If that is what the school wants to do they can do that but we are not
:07:55. > :07:59.going to make that demand. OK. get to the... You make the point it
:07:59. > :08:03.is patronising to suggest it is the poorest in the world who should not
:08:03. > :08:07.have a choice. There is an argument that what you are doing undermines
:08:07. > :08:16.the government system. The head of education at Save the Children says
:08:16. > :08:19.it diverts attention away from the problem. Even if you have this
:08:19. > :08:23.sector as a low-cost, it is not doing anything to address the more
:08:23. > :08:26.fundamental problem and you could be driving down costs. Many people,
:08:26. > :08:36.governments, aid agencies - all of these people are investing and that
:08:36. > :08:42.is right. Pearson works for governments all over the world.
:08:42. > :08:46.you undermining what they are doing? I have worked for government.
:08:46. > :08:56.It is a huge part of solving the education of citizens in the
:08:56. > :09:02.
:09:02. > :09:05.developing world. And we have to improve government systems. That is
:09:05. > :09:11.good but there is lots of investment there. The low-cost
:09:11. > :09:17.private sector is undoubtedly part of the solution. Remember what I
:09:17. > :09:22.said - 70% of the children in Delhi are in low-cost private schools.
:09:22. > :09:30.Even if you make the public sector perfect - and it is a long way from
:09:30. > :09:33.that - there needs to be low-cost private so we are investing in that.
:09:33. > :09:36.We are in favour of people investing in government. The low-
:09:36. > :09:40.cost private schools are cheaper per person than the government
:09:40. > :09:43.system. Before we look at that and the quality - ideally, would the
:09:43. > :09:49.state be providing education and would they be providing that for
:09:49. > :09:52.free? In an ideal world I would like the government to provide free
:09:52. > :10:02.education for everybody but also I would like somebody to be able to
:10:02. > :10:04.
:10:04. > :10:08.choose a school with the option of choice. I know you do not like a
:10:08. > :10:11.false dichotomy but what you are actually doing is trying to prove
:10:11. > :10:17.that there is an expanding market for profit education and there will
:10:17. > :10:20.be some - there are people - who say, what are you trying to do? You
:10:20. > :10:30.are getting to the point way where you are going to effectively
:10:30. > :10:34.
:10:34. > :10:37.control education. Government will say let's contract it out. Maybe
:10:37. > :10:40.they will be contracting out the eduction to non-profit and profit
:10:40. > :10:44.organisations, but the most important thing is that governments,
:10:44. > :10:47.instead of saying "All they have to do is fix the government sector",
:10:47. > :10:51.they should ask the question, how do we get all of the children a
:10:51. > :10:55.good education as fast as possible? We are going to have 9 billion
:10:55. > :11:00.people on the planet in 2050. This will only be done if we get an
:11:00. > :11:09.improved education system. If you were to win the argument, people
:11:09. > :11:12.need to know the intentions of Pearson. An influential American
:11:12. > :11:15.commentator says she opposes because the idea is to get the
:11:15. > :11:20.system up and running and then get the government to foot the bill.
:11:20. > :11:30.This implies there is global domination. Education around the
:11:30. > :11:32.world is a huge enterprise. More and more money is going in and I
:11:33. > :11:42.think governments, for the foreseeable future, should be the
:11:43. > :11:43.
:11:43. > :11:46.major provider of education. I work with governments all the time to
:11:46. > :11:49.help them in improving their eduction systems and I am in favour
:11:49. > :11:53.of governments but there are many parents across the developing world
:11:53. > :11:56.who cannot get the good education they need and are choosing low-cost
:11:56. > :11:59.private schools. If we invest in some of those changes we can
:11:59. > :12:03.demonstrate that you can get high quality, consistent, good education
:12:03. > :12:13.at a low cost. That is what we want to demonstrate. It is one part of
:12:13. > :12:14.
:12:14. > :12:16.the solution in developing countries. Some say there must be
:12:16. > :12:19.some questions raised about the ideological concern that is
:12:20. > :12:25.provided. What kind of teachers will be hired for the schools? Will
:12:25. > :12:30.they be teachers or computer monitors? Could there also be
:12:30. > :12:33.teachers with different agendas? How can you ensure the quality?
:12:33. > :12:43.you are providing education in any country, there are some regulatory
:12:43. > :12:45.
:12:45. > :12:55.obligations. Pearson, or any other provider - and we are in a minority
:12:55. > :12:57.
:12:57. > :13:00.stake - any provider needs to work within a regulatory framework. The
:13:00. > :13:04.curriculum will be set by the country they are in and the
:13:04. > :13:12.teachers will be good, young people who are going to turn up and do a
:13:12. > :13:15.good job. In Bangladesh, there is a wonderful NGO which you may have
:13:15. > :13:18.heard of, a fantastic organisation, which runs 30,000 primary schools.
:13:18. > :13:26.They are not for profit but they are outside of the government
:13:26. > :13:29.sector. The people they recruit are young women from their local
:13:29. > :13:32.community who have a good secondary education, who are reliable and
:13:32. > :13:39.turn up every day, are well trained, get mentored well and do a
:13:39. > :13:43.fantastic job. If you go to those schools you will see the children
:13:43. > :13:47.happy and learning. If you went to a government school in the same
:13:47. > :13:56.area you will not see that. example you have cited is a not-
:13:56. > :14:02.for-profit organisation. You are a former Labour candidate. A long
:14:02. > :14:06.time ago. Here you are, arguing and saying that we have to show that
:14:06. > :14:12.for-profit works. How comfortable are you with that? You know that
:14:12. > :14:22.people will be suspicious that you may be just about making money.
:14:22. > :14:22.
:14:22. > :14:26.am comfortable with this. The burning passion for me and for
:14:26. > :14:29.Pearson is that there is a burning issue right now of millions of
:14:29. > :14:33.children around the world who are not getting the education they need.
:14:33. > :14:36.They need it now, not in ten years' time. If you look at youth
:14:36. > :14:46.unemployment in places like Pakistan, North Africa, this is a
:14:46. > :14:49.huge social issue that is very urgent. I hope we will work with
:14:49. > :14:51.governments to improve their systems but in the meantime we have
:14:51. > :14:57.millions of parents across India, Pakistan, North Africa, choosing
:14:57. > :15:00.low-cost private schools. What is wrong with investment to improve
:15:00. > :15:06.and get consistency in schools and get what the parents want? They
:15:06. > :15:12.know it is important. We are going to help the parents get that.
:15:12. > :15:21.if you do not get it right? If you are the investor... I did not mean
:15:21. > :15:26.I am wondering about the millions who don't get an education. Let's
:15:26. > :15:29.get back and take that broad question. Take climate change, the
:15:29. > :15:33.future of the economy, war and peace, the distribution of wealth
:15:33. > :15:38.around the planet. All of these things are huge problems. Take
:15:38. > :15:46.conflict. Take the risk of nuclear weapons and all those other things
:15:46. > :15:49.getting into the wrong hands. All the problems we know about. I'm not
:15:49. > :15:53.saying education can solve those, but I am saying this. Education is
:15:53. > :15:56.a key part to the solution. Unless, as a global community we really
:15:56. > :16:04.improve the quality of education, we have very big problems ahead.
:16:04. > :16:10.I'm pleased we're making progress. I hope we get close. Can we meet
:16:10. > :16:16.them? We're two or three years away. I think it will be a push but
:16:16. > :16:20.everybody should get behind them. It is global, with the right will
:16:20. > :16:24.in the right countries. And the private sector is part of that
:16:24. > :16:28.solution? Of course. Take the work I have been doing with the minister
:16:28. > :16:32.in Punjab in Pakistan. His enrolment drive has been focused on,
:16:32. > :16:42.not can I get these children out of government schools into those
:16:42. > :16:44.
:16:44. > :16:47.schools, it is, let's get children who are out of school, into school.
:16:47. > :16:54.We have thought about Pearson being, well, it describes itself as the
:16:54. > :17:01.world's leading learning company. It provides training, funding for
:17:01. > :17:06.schools. It also has an opportunity, with the dramatic reforms going on
:17:06. > :17:10.in the British scoring system, to actually run schools. It could set
:17:10. > :17:20.up a free school. Would Pearson be interested? I just want to make
:17:20. > :17:23.
:17:23. > :17:26.this point. There will soon be 20 billion people on the planet. There
:17:26. > :17:30.are 7 billion people on the earth now. The demands of the labour
:17:30. > :17:33.market is such that each of those people need to learn more and
:17:33. > :17:37.better than ever before to succeed as a citizen in the fast-moving
:17:37. > :17:44.world. The demand for education is going to be vast out there. Pearson
:17:44. > :17:47.will be part of that. They are the people we want to serve. One of the
:17:47. > :17:52.things we're obsessed with is not just whether our products satisfy
:17:52. > :18:00.consumers, it is whether they achieve outcomes. That is part of
:18:00. > :18:05.my job. Just to come to the British example, massive changes going on,
:18:05. > :18:09.with these free schools set up one year ago based on a Swedish model.
:18:09. > :18:13.The idea is that a school is free of constraints that have typically
:18:13. > :18:20.been on it, but still funded by the state. In one sense I can see you,
:18:20. > :18:27.given your history, as someone being interested in that idea.
:18:27. > :18:30.Right. Just to make this clear for viewers, I was a big part of the
:18:30. > :18:32.Tony Blair administration's education reforms. We have had a
:18:32. > :18:38.20-year trend towards the devolution of resources, autonomy
:18:38. > :18:41.to school level. That is a good thing. The growth of the academies
:18:41. > :18:49.which are a bit like charter schools and now the free schools
:18:49. > :18:52.where individuals can come into the system... That is good. For Pearson
:18:52. > :18:55.specifically, the regulatory framework does not allow for the
:18:55. > :19:01.private sector to set up free schools. And it is not a priority
:19:01. > :19:08.for us. You have pointed out the regulatory framework, but the
:19:08. > :19:13.Swedish model does. There is an expectation that it may be a matter
:19:13. > :19:19.of time. Is that right? Is there an inevitability that free schools
:19:19. > :19:29.will be able to be run for profit? I don't think it is remotely
:19:29. > :19:32.
:19:32. > :19:35.evitable. There is one free school we have been supporting. I
:19:36. > :19:42.personally have been arguing in favour of this back when I was in
:19:42. > :19:45.the Tony Blair administration. I am in favour of it. I didn't win the
:19:45. > :19:52.argument inside. You didn't win. Was it the unions? Tony Blair? You
:19:52. > :19:57.were his education guru. It would have been a big battle in the
:19:57. > :20:00.Labour Party obviously. But my argument is this. Your job as a
:20:00. > :20:03.government is to get children a good education as fast as possible.
:20:03. > :20:09.I was arguing, where you have poorly performing schools, finding
:20:09. > :20:19.ways to replace them. Which was the point of academies. And the
:20:19. > :20:23.academies did that. For Pearson, it is not a priority, this is not
:20:23. > :20:27.something we are urging government to do. We are in dialogue with
:20:27. > :20:32.government about a range of things but this is not a priority. But you
:20:32. > :20:35.would like to see it move towards profit? I have always thought that
:20:35. > :20:42.should be an option, particularly for replacing failing schools. That
:20:42. > :20:47.is what I have argued in the past. The jury is still out on academies,
:20:47. > :20:51.because of the various ways of testing. As it is on free schools.
:20:51. > :20:55.Clearly the jury is out on free schools because the first one just
:20:56. > :21:02.finished the academic year. Some of those are very experimental. The
:21:02. > :21:06.jury is still out on free schools. But the idea you can set up a
:21:06. > :21:11.school if you have a good idea and there is some parental demand,
:21:11. > :21:20.seems to be extending choice, giving parents the opportunity. It
:21:20. > :21:23.seems very sensible. I am curious about this. When people look at the
:21:23. > :21:29.record of charter scores in the United States, or in Sweden, it is
:21:29. > :21:31.still not clear if they are successful. The early round some
:21:31. > :21:36.academies are undoubtedly outperforming the rest of the
:21:36. > :21:45.system. Are they? When you look at the data you get different
:21:45. > :21:51.arguments. We will see the A-levels in August. I want to say another
:21:51. > :21:54.thing. I have looked at data on charter schools in the US. If you
:21:54. > :22:00.have a general answer, are charter schools outperforming all public
:22:00. > :22:10.schools? You're not going to find that answer. The policy on its own
:22:10. > :22:12.
:22:12. > :22:17.is not the answer. What is the academy doing? How do they work?
:22:17. > :22:21.You need to translate that around. The good chains are undoubtedly
:22:21. > :22:31.having better results. The United Learning Trust. Ark. The Harris
:22:31. > :22:35.group in South London. These are excellent groups. If you go to
:22:35. > :22:39.Hackney, which is where I have lived for much of the past 30 years,
:22:39. > :22:43.it used to be known as the worst education system in England. Back
:22:43. > :22:52.in 1995 I was involved in the closure of Hackney Downs school.
:22:52. > :22:55.Now it outperforms many other schools. Do you find yourself in a
:22:55. > :23:05.strange situation of telling the Conservative Education Secretary to
:23:05. > :23:06.
:23:06. > :23:09.go for it, to push further? When I look back on the Blair
:23:09. > :23:13.administration, and I think you asked Tony Blair, he would give the
:23:13. > :23:17.same answer, I don't think we went fast enough. We should have gone
:23:17. > :23:20.further. I cannot impress enough on you how much I think it is
:23:20. > :23:24.important that we improve the quality of education, not just here,
:23:24. > :23:29.but around the world. I think we could have gone further. We could
:23:29. > :23:33.have gone faster. Is it unions and their vested interests holding it
:23:34. > :23:39.back? There are unions all around the world and they take varying
:23:39. > :23:42.positions. I don't want to sweep them away in a broad brush. But we
:23:42. > :23:46.need people in our school systems who see the importance of improving
:23:46. > :23:51.the quality of education rapidly to give young people the best chance
:23:51. > :23:54.they can have in life. Obviously in any large system there are people
:23:54. > :24:02.afraid of change who defend the status quo, and who find change