The Corbyn Clause and the threat to good schools

Falling numbers of pupils will create pressure to prop up struggling schools, by taking pupils away from good schools

During the debate on the Second Reading of the Schools Bill, Jeremy Corbyn praised the way the Bill will give new powers to local authorities to control the number of pupils in academy schools.

Jeremy Corbyn: Could the Secretary of State comment on the falling rolls in some parts of this country, particularly London? Most local authorities unfortunately take the option of closing schools, which is very damaging to children and to local communities. Clause 50 appears to give her some powers of intervention, so we could perhaps instead downsize such schools, which would mean we kept the sense of them being community schools. That is so important, particularly in the poorest parts of many London boroughs. Can she give us some hope that there will be intervention, so that we keep community schools?

Bridget Phillipson: A number of provisions in the Bill deal precisely with that challenge. We recognise that in London—but shortly this will be the case right across our country—there are challenges that come with falling rolls and making sure that we manage that properly. That will require schools to work with local councils, and to collaborate on managing admissions and place planning.

I wrote about Clause 50 before - it gives the local authority the ability to object if good schools want to grow - or even if an academy is proposing to keep its numbers (its “Published Admission Number”) the same.

In the context of falling pupil numbers it will be tempting for local authorities to prop up unpopular schools (particularly LA-run ones) by “sharing out” the pupils from more successful schools.

Rather than the normal split between the regulator and the provider, Local Authorities will be both.

Politicians in some local authorities have never liked school freedom, and it will be tempting for them to push down numbers in academies to protect the schools they run – even if they are not the best.

(In the quote above Corbyn talks about “Community Schools” - that’s the jargon for local-authority-run schools).

The context

In this post I want to explain the context of Clause 50 - what I now think of as the “Corbyn Clause”.

In the July the DFE updated their forecasts for pupil numbers. The number of pupils in state-funded nursery & primary schools is set to fall from 4,564,000 in 2024 to 4,357,000 in 2028 - a drop of 207,000 (or 4.5%).

In contrast the secondary school population is projected to be 3,263,000 in 2028. This is 29,000 higher than the total in 2024 (3,234,000), as numbers are only expected to peak in 2026/27.

Still, this is a new era and an extraordinary turnaround after the growth in the period since 2010 where overall numbers increased sharply. From 2011/12 to 2023/24 the number of people working in state schools increased nearly 97,000 - or around 11%.

A degree of caution is needed - although the forecast drop in primary pupil numbers is still large, it is actually a smaller drop than the DFE were previously predicting, and it may well be revised again.

That might not seem so dramatic - but the national picture conceals massive local variations.

DFE compiles local authority pupil forecasts. Obviously at the local level forecasting gets even harder, and the margin of error bigger. But the forecasts show how different the situation is likely to be in different bits of the country.

Here’s the forecast change in the numbers in primary schools. While numbers in the Midlands are forecast to rise, London LAs are forecasting dramatic declines, with one in ten or even one in eight pupils disappearing over just four years. Similar things are forecast in other urban areas.

Here’s the forecast for secondary schools, where the decline will start later. Even in secondary, London sees decline in the near term.

Putting them together, here’s the total number:

Conclusion

The Schools Bill strikes at academies in multiple ways - taking away their freedoms over pay, hiring and curriculum. But as well as the content of academy freedoms, it also strikes at the growth of academies.

One of Labour’s first moves in 1997 was to publish a list of failing schools and start intervening in them. After trying other things, it became apparent that the best way to intervene was to make them academies and put them under new management.

The Schools Bill abolishes the academy order, under which failing LA schools are turned into academies. Dame Siobhan McDonagh in her speech during the second reading gave a great explanation of why abandoning this central reform is such a mistake.

The best way of all to turn round a struggling school is to make it part of a strong trust. But government has abolished the Academy Grant and Trust Capacity Fund that support that process.

The Schools Bill also takes us back to Local Authorities setting up new schools.

At best, this creates a messy situation.

But I am particularly nervous about it in the context of the other measures in the Bill like the Corbyn Clause, which reverse the reforms not just of the Blair years, but the reforms of the late 1980s.

Those reforms enabled the best schools to grow, and unshackled them from local authorities, and ushered in the era of parental choice – a powerful motor for school improvement.

Now the government is creating a vehicle for local authorities to object even if an outstanding school just wants to keep its pupil numbers the same.

Corbyn likes it, and Phillipson seemed to confirm his interpretation.

Parents should be very, very nervous.