Academies Bill [Lords]

Absolutely, and one point that I will come to is that the evidence on the free schools system in Sweden and the charter schools in the US has been presented extremely partially. That evidence is not as uncontested, and the findings are not as clear, as has been suggested. I shall give examples in a moment that show serious problems emerging. Privatisation is not set out in the Bill, and the Government are not bringing it in through straightforward measures, but it is writ large through every clause and the intention is very clear. Liberty from the dead hand of bureaucracy, which is how the Bill is being presented, is merely a catchphrase, nothing more, designed to shield the Government's true ideological concerns. I shall move briefly, if I may, to Sweden—[Interruption.] Well, I will not move to Sweden—I am actually staying in Wales, it is a lovely place—but I shall discuss it briefly. There have been relatively few studies in Sweden and the US of how the free schools and charter schools have worked, but most of them have been rehashed assiduously by the outriders of the Tory party in the think-tanks as part of their cheerleading for the free schools system. In truth, the results of those studies are far less clear than they present them as being. For example, one study that coalition Members have cited is by Böhlmark and Lindahl, but they stated that the studies conducted in Sweden had shown that free schools had increased social segregation. In fact, they stated that division had occurred in almost every area of the country where the system was observed. More importantly, Sweden has not soared up the PISA rankings for the international benchmarking of education. If anything, it has faltered and fallen back as the free schools system has been introduced. I turn briefly to the US where, again, the evidence is nowhere near as clear as it has been presented. The case of the charter schools is not as straightforward as the Secretary of State, who I see has re-entered the Chamber, has said. He cited in his speech the Rockoff and Hoxby report—almost the only wholly positive report that I can find on charter schools. Even it raises some serious questions. Its conclusion states:"““All three studies find that students who enroll in charter schools experience a drop in achievement relative to similar students in public schools. This drop in achievement is restricted to the first few years of the charter schools' existence””." However, it is appreciable. That underlines that we are considering an experiment, which is not being widely consulted upon. We should be wary of experimenting with our children's future. I shall conclude with a quote from another US academic, Diane Ravitch, an educationalist who has been an adviser to successive US Presidents, including George W. Bush. She initially believed that charter schools were a good idea, but changed her mind after seeing them in action. She now says that"““public education itself is at risk. On the current course… we will see thousands of public schools turned over to private entrepreneurs… an explosion of privatization… Some articles extol unproven ideas and lack any fairness or balance.””" She goes on to say that there is"““a lot of research showing that charter schools don't do any better… than regular public schools.””" Hon. Members opposite should look hard at the evidence and not simply listen to Front Benchers. They should be worried about such wholesale experimentation's being visited on our children with unseemly haste. The Bill is a dangerous measure, which may have a seriously detrimental impact on the education of all our children. I shall not support it tonight.