Anders Hultin, an architect of the Swedish government’s voucher system, says the Tories’ plan to emulate it will fail unless they encourage a new breed of education entrepreneurs
For us Swedes, it is gratifying to see David Cameron put our free schools model at the heart of his reform agenda. He has chosen well. In a few short years, the voucher system has transformed education in Sweden and led to the creation of almost a thousand new schools. But the Conservative leader has failed to grasp a key aspect of their success. To flourish, these schools must be allowed to make a profit.
This isn’t just one of a long list of pessimistic predictions — it’s the only crucial criticism; he can ignore the rest. The doubts I hear about school choice in England now are the same ones I heard when I helped draft the policy as an adviser in the Swedish education and science department in 1992. Who on earth, we were asked, would want to set up their own school? Surely low-income parents don’t want choice — they just want their local school to improve. Our political opponents thought the policy such a dud they didn’t even bother to attack it. Even we had our doubts. Our proposal was fairly simple: anyone could set up a school, and be paid the going rate (or, at the time, a bit less) that the state-run schools were receiving. But in our heart of hearts, we did not expect a rush of applicants. This is a symbolic policy, I was told by a colleague. It was in our manifesto, so we had to honour it.
Isn’t it strange how little faith government places in the people whose lives it seeks to organise? Once we put our ‘symbolic’ policy into practice, and handed power from government to communities, the effect was extraordinary. A thousand flowers bloomed. Or, more accurately, the number of independent schools grew from 80 to 1,100 — educating 10 per cent of all pupils at the compulsory education age and 20 per cent of those in upper secondary. The drive and energy came from outside government: we in the education department just paid the bills. This, perhaps, explains the success: it was a grassroots-led revolution. Where communities were unhappy with their school, they did not need to petition parliament or local government. They could find a school provider, and set up a new one.
More articles from: Anders Hultin | this section
Post this entry to: del.icio.us | Digg | Newsvine | NowPublic | Reddit
Advertisement
It’s time to tackle student Islamists
Michael BurleighConfessions of a middle-class anarchist
Harry MountFor Pakistan, America is the enemy
Christina Lamb1 The phosphorus cloud over Ha'aretz - Melanie Phillips
2 Another blow for the climate change lobby: Prince Charles
3 By the waters of denial they sit and weep... - Melanie Phillips
4 Amnesty International, Moazzam Begg and the Bravery of Gita Sahgal - Martin Bright
5 American tea-party dishes hopey-changey thing - Melanie Phillips
1 Another blow for the climate change lobby: Prince Charles (62)
2 American tea-party dishes hopey-changey thing - Melanie Phillips (58)
3 Why give money to charity when they shaft what they purport to defend? - Rod Liddle (42)
4 Dying for new roads? - Melanie Phillips (26)
5 More news from the un-level playing field - Susan Hill (21)
WELCOME TO LOVE GENERATIONS Online dating for the over 50s An online dating site for single men and women in
GASCONY, SW France, near Condom-en-Armagnac 13th Century stone house, 21st Century luxury for 12 in 5 en-suites. 50 acres +
BOSC LEBAT, SW France. Only 45 minutes from Toulouse Airport with daily flights from most provincial airports avoiding the horrors
Spectator Business | Apollo Magazine
Corporate | Advertising | Privacy | Terms
Spectator, 22 Old Queen Street, London, SW1H 9HP
All Articles and Content Copyright ©2010 by The Spectator | All Rights Reserved
Be the first to comment on this article!
Back to top