Alan Johnson's first major public speech as Education Secretary highlights extending opportunity to those who find the 'scales of educational achievement tipped heavily against them' as a key priority for futue policy.

This is my first major speech as Education Secretary, a position I am delighted to hold at this quiet and tranquil time in British politics, the day after third reading of the Education and Inspections Bill in the House of Commons.

I would like to thank the Fabian Society for hosting this event. Two of my most illustrious predecessors – Tony Crosland and Shirley Williams – were chairs of the Fabian Society; the Fabian Commission recently published its excellent report on Life Chances and Child Poverty; and, in my speech today, I will outline Labour's school reforms firmly in the context of Fabian history.

Because although our reforms raise passions on all sides, I believe they are true to the social values, economic goals and pragmatic approach which have bound the progressives together for over a hundred years. When the Fabians were formed in 1884, one eminent Victorian writer might have described it as the best of times, the worst of times.

England was home to the world's greatest universities, scientists and intellectuals, whose ideas had inspired the industrial, technological and political revolutions that were transforming the world. But our universities remained the preserve of a tiny elite, with most people, to paraphrase Thomas Hardy, remaining in their own sphere, and sticking to their own trade.

England was home to the world's oldest and greatest schools, but they were far too expensive for the families of most children, who left an inadequate education system by the age of 12.

England was the richest nation in the world; yet also tolerated the kind of abject poverty and disease so vividly described and condemned by the early Fabians.

Then, our education system exacerbated, instead of diminishing inequality; sharpening, rather than softening social division. In the dispiriting card game that determined a child's chances, money trumped talent; privilege beat potential; and affluence overcame ability.

Lord Melbourne's purported comment to Queen Victoria encapsulates it best:

"I don't know, Ma'am, why they make all this fuss about education; none of the Pagets can read or write, and they get on well enough."

The early social progressives who founded first the Fabians and then the Labour Party heralded a new era of radical reforms covering the constitution, education and welfare. Over the whole of the last century - through Balfour, Beveridge and Butler - no-one could doubt the enormous power of education in individual growth, social cohesion and economic expansion.

Today, we are driving reforms through within a robust social partnership. But progress has not always been consistent.

In the eighties and nineties, schools were starved of investment, teachers were underpaid and under-respected, classrooms were peeling yet packed; and there was just one tatty text book for every two or three pupils.

Tony Blair made his first major speech as party leader, symbolically, here at the Institute of Education – re-enforcing the message that education is our number one priority.

Since then, we have almost doubled education spending so today, pupils have new books; classrooms are connected to computers; schools are being rebuilt and refurbished at an unprecedented rate; and there are more teachers, better equipped and better paid than ever before. Our aggressive determination to tackle systemic problems around failing schools, and poor standards of literacy and numeracy have thrown into sharp relief the inertia which characterised the incredible tolerance of poor schooling in the past.

Today, almost 100,000 more 11 year olds reach the required standard in English or Maths than in 1997. 1,300 failing schools have been turned around, helping half a million pupils. There are 130,000 more support staff, 32,000 more teachers, and pay is up by 20%.

But reform is for life, not just the first two terms.

We must press on in the direction that was set when Tony Blair became leader. The challenge for the third term and beyond is to sustain and reinvigorate the intellectual momentum behind educational reform; to continue to increase the breadth and quality of education in this country.

We have never been in government for nine continuous years before, so it is unchartered territory. The process of continuing reform over a long period in power may well offend those simple souls who believe that a successful government leads us all to a land of milk and honey over about six years, after which any reform is an admission of previous failure. But progressive government is about constant reform and renewal.

There are three areas where we must do more.

First, promoting genuine educational opportunity for all.

This Government has achieved an awful lot since 1997, but if we blow our trumpet at all it should be to sound an alarm for the continuing failures in our education system. The fact is that some children still get a raw deal. From the moment they are born, the scales of educational achievement are tipped heavily against them.

1 in 10 children on free school meals leave school without a single qualification. Looked after children, which includes children in care, are five times less likely to get five good GCSEs than their peers. African Caribbean children are four times as likely to leave school with no GCSEs.

In the days of the early Fabians, it was only a very small minority who received a good education; but today it is only a very small minority who don't – which is arguably an even harsher condition.

Just as a good education can be the springboard to success; a poor education can be a life sentence to poverty. And because it is those groups who are already liable to social exclusion that the education system also fails, that we make a bad system worse: running the risk of wider community unrest, greater racial tension, and deeper social exclusion.

Second, our drive in standards must accelerate at least as fast as our global competitors.

We can not presume our intellectual or economic pre-eminence. China and India are producing 4 million graduates a year. All over South East Asia and Africa new schools are opening up, bringing hope to regions which have been locked in abject poverty for centuries.

England is never going to be able to compete with low skill, low wage economies on cost. We need to aim our sights at the first class jobs, which needs a first class education system.

Which is why it is all the more shocking that England's share of 17 year olds in education is 37th out of the 40 major industrial economies. We're way behind countries like Korea. We have to ensure that the school leaving age is an irrelevance because all youngsters stay in full time education until they're at least 18.

Third, we must maximise the return from our unprecedented investment in our education system.

In the 60s, Anthony Crosland described his struggle with the education budget as trying to get a quart out of a pint pot. Today, we've got a quart, but the challenge is to make a gallon from it. The measure for educational achievement is not how much money you put in, but what results you get out. So we need to make sure we match our massive investment with radical reform.

If we don't, we risk losing the argument for universally provided, publicly funded services; which opens the door for those who want to break up and privatise our public services. We need to demonstrate that the public sector can outperform the private sector. And the commitment to match levels of spending in independent schools gives us a great launch-pad to do so.

These are my three top themes for action. In terms of how we convert these into practical policies, there are five areas I want to highlight.

First, getting more help to looked after children.

Looked after children are:

• five times more likely to move school in the run up to their GCSEs;

•

• up to twenty five times more likely to end up in prison, or some form of custody as adults.

I don't underestimate the difficulties given that many of these children have endured harsh abuse, terrible neglect and have emotional and mental health needs as a result. But I am determined we should tackle this. Not only because it's right for the child, but because if a society can be judged by how well it looks after its most vulnerable, we do not emerge with much credit in this area.

We are preparing a Green Paper for publication this Summer where we will look at all of the factors which affect the performance of looked after children – in and out of the classroom. I want to look at the way that social workers work with school; at how parenting is delivered by the carers who work with the child every day; and whether we can make local authorities and schools more accountable for the outcomes of looked after children.

Second, we need to get tougher on failing schools.

The Bill included new powers for local authorities, but society must get tougher too: less emotional and more practical.

It is upsetting for everyone concerned when, despite every effort, a school fails. Let me be clear, calling a school a failed school does not mean either the teachers failed or the pupils failed. In fact, it doesn't get much tougher for any teacher than working in a failing school - and society should thank such teachers, not condemn them.

Nor does a failing school represent a failure by the pupils. What it does represent is a failure by the state to meet the needs of local children.

Failing schools need to be tackled, not tolerated. Pitching hope against reason only lets more children down. Schools can't stay in special measures for ever and, the more we press this issue, the more likely we will be to head off failure before it occurs.

Academies offer a clear and viable way out for failing schools. Despite some misleading reports, results in Academies are improving at three times the overall national rate, despite having twice the number of children on free school meals.

In addition, almost all of them have been massively oversubscribed. Last September, Lambeth, City of London and Mossbourne Academies received over 1,200 applications for 180 places in each.

27 Academies are already open and 18 more are set to open this September. We have already got 100 Academies in the pipeline; and we're determined to have at least 200 Academies open or in train by 2010.

Third, we need to raise more schools to the standard of the best.

With nine years successful experience in raising educational attainment, we must build on what we know can work. The schools which perform best drive up standards within the school by drawing energy and expertise from outside. They have a confident manner, a distinct ethos and a hunger from improvement. They embrace the local community, rather than slamming the school gates on outside help and support. The Bill gives more schools the scope and structure to match this success by enabling them to become self governing trust schools, so that they can form productive federations with the public, private and voluntary sectors.

A growing number of schools are indicating they want to choose this route to benefit from trust status.

Lesley McGuigan, the headteacher of Kingsley College, Worcestershire believes that she could use trust status to draw in the local university and local businesses to give a new perspective on learning and exploit links with industry.

Terry Creissen, the principal of Colne Community School, is working with a number of other headteachers in North East Essex exploring the idea of establishing a trust school partnership. They've been working together for years but believe a trust would formalise the partnership and put it on a firm foundation for the future.

The reason these headteachers, and others like them, are expressing an interest in trust schools is because they offer an opportunity to improve performance, which is only difficult to contemplate if you believe the rubbish that has been talked about what a trust school means.

Such as the myth that trust schools will cream off the best pupils by selection – when the truth is that they will work under exactly the same code of fair admission as other schools with academic selection ruled out.

Or the myth that third parties shouldn't get involved in schools – when the truth is that third parties have shaped our most successful schools from the 11th Century right through to the 21st Century, with high achieving specialist schools, academies and foundation schools.

Or the myth that trusts are about privatising state schools by the back door – when trusts remain part of the local authority family; and subject to the national curriculum, ofsted inspections and can't charge fees.

I sometimes wonder if some of the hostility to trust schools is less about what they are and more about what the represent. It is a bizarre kind of reverse elitism amongst the chattering classes which tolerates failing comprehensives whilst denigrating any suggestion of diversity away from the traditional local authority model.

We need to fight these ideological demons.

We must celebrate success and replicate it further, welcoming private generosity and embracing altruism; not seeking refuge in the failed policies of the past, however worthy the ideological principles which underpinned them.

Fourth, we need to make sure that all parents get a decent choice about where children go to school.

Choice should not be a pejorative term.

The truth is most parents are already able to exercise a good informed choice about their child's school. They can buy a good house in the right area; they can navigate the complex bureaucracy; and they can assimilate data on school performance.

They can even pretend to be god-fearing, if that helps their chances – hurrying to church for a quick knees down on a couple of Sundays. But these options are not available for everyone – not parents with poor basic skills themselves, whose first language is not English, who do not have the kind of social and community support they need.

Of course every parent wants the local school to be the perfect school for their child, but sometimes this will not be the case. And, those parents should still be able to make an informed choice between different types of schools, including specialist schools. We need to look hard at what other barriers to choice may exist. A good example of this is the way that free school transport only takes children to the nearest school, effectively denying them the opportunity to go to any other school. That's why, in the Bill, we extended this so that they have access to free school transport to their three nearest secondary schools within a six mile radius.

We want more schools to collaborate, strengthening ties between schools, and pushing up the availability of good school places.

We will put £12 million into creating a network of choice advisers in the next two years. They will target disadvantaged parents, and help them make an informed decision. The advisers will operate in a sympathetic, personal and community, not bureaucracy, based way. Some of this advisory role will be performed by local authorities. This will represent a sea change in attitude and a key change in role. Local authorities will have to become more focussed on the needs of the parent and the pupil, and less focussed on their role as a provider of school places and protector of weak schools.

This is a small but significant redistribution of power from providers back to parents, pupils and schools.

Fifth, if we're to raise everyone's educational attainment, we need to take a more personalised approach to learning for each and every child.

We must not write off some children as unfit for the world of education. It is our responsibility to make the education system fit the needs of all children.

As Beveridge wrote, the "lack of opportunity to use abilities is one of the greatest causes of unhappiness."

We need to unlock everyone's diverse capabilities. This doesn't mean one to one tuition, it does mean responding to the individual needs of children who are stuck, bored or demotivated and re-engaging them with the education system. Lots of good schools are already doing this, such as Preston Manor School in Brent which offers mentoring, catch up sessions and out of hours schooling; but we want more schools to follow their lead.

A holistic approach to schooling is vital. And I reject completely the view that the "every child matters" agenda conflicts in someway with raising standards. Health, welfare and upbringing are all vital parts of attainment; so if we want to raise standards, we need to look at all aspects of a child's development.

We're set to invest an extra £1 billion a year extra into personalised learning in the medium term. The Gilbert Review is looking at what might happen in the longer term. Our country isn't the same as it was one hundred years ago, nor should our classrooms be.

But changing classrooms alone will not be enough. One of the most underplayed, yet most redoubtable parts of the current Bill was the right for all 14 to 19 year olds to study specialised diplomas. This has the potential to help tackle three major problems: the skills gap; youth unemployment; and classroom disengagement.

These diplomas will free children from learning academic subjects they have no interest or aptitude for, unleashing them to explore their professional potential in areas such as engineering or tourism. We'll be trialling the new qualifications from this September, putting a full pilot in place next year before teaching the first 5 specialised diplomas from 2008. From 2013, the national entitlement will enable all young people to choose a professional diploma that suits them.

In closing, England's schools have achieved the best results ever. But our educational story has been one of continuous improvement and continuous reform. If it hadn't been, we'd still be sending children up the chimneys.

Last night's vote was not the last word on reform. We must push ahead with a refreshed and revitalised radicalism in our schools policy. If we don't, we will lose the centre left consensus that has joined our movement together for over a hundred years. We'll lose the momentum, lose the argument and may well lose office.

Having seen educational progress stall for 18 years, we know the consequences.

Alan Johnson spoke to the Fabian Society on Thursday 25th May 2006 at an event hosted by the Institute of Education.