Tag: Tristram Hunt

  • Tristram Hunt – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    Tristram Hunt – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Work and Pensions

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Tristram Hunt on 2016-04-15.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, how many jobs in (a) his Department and (b) each of his Department’s non-departmental public bodies, executive agencies, non-ministerial departments, advisory bodies and other accountable statutory bodies (i) have been abolished in or relocated from East Cheshire Local Authority since 2010 and (ii) will be abolished in or relocated from East Cheshire Local Authority by 2020.

    Justin Tomlinson

    The number of people employed in DWP offices in East Cheshire Local Authority area at March 2011, which is the earliest information available, was 198. The current number of people employed as at March 2016, which is the latest information available, is 135. The reduction is in line with increased efficiencies and reducing workloads as more people have moved into work.

    Health and Safety Executive (HSE) has only had an office presence in East Cheshire Local Authority area, in Crewe, since 25 January 2016. This follows the relocation of 31 staff from Stoke-on-Trent on that date with no staff losses at that time. As of March 2016 HSE has 30 staff based in Crewe.

    DWP and HSE have not yet developed detailed workforce plans up to 2020. There are currently no further plans for relocation or specific reductions of posts in East Cheshire.

  • Tristram Hunt – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    Tristram Hunt – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Home Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Tristram Hunt on 2016-01-07.

    To ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department, how many jobs in (a) her Department and (b) each of its non-departmental public bodies, executive agencies, non-ministerial departments, advisory bodies and other accountable statutory bodies (i) have been abolished or relocated from Stoke-on-Trent since 2010 and (ii) will be abolished in or relocated from Stoke-on-Trent by 2020.

    Karen Bradley

    The Department records actual staffing levels, but does not centrally record the number of jobs by location. Actual staffing levels for (a) the Department, between March 2010 and March 2015, have slightly reduced (less than 10 FTE¹) in Stoke-on-Trent. However, this does not necessarily mean that posts have been abolished or relocated as a consequence.

    The Department is still planning its workforce requirements for 2020 in line with the Spending Review settlement; this level of detail is not yet known.

    (b) For the Department’s executive non-departmental public bodies and statutory bodies, there have been no staff or offices based in Stoke-on-Trent during this period. The Department’s executive non-departmental Public Bodies are:

    • the Independent Police Complaints Commission;

    • the Gangmasters Licensing Authority;

    • the Office of the Immigration Services Commissioner;

    • the Security Industry Authority; and

    • the Disclosure and Barring Service

    None of the Department’s Advisory and Tribunal NDPBs employ staff or have offices in Stoke-on-Trent.

    ¹Data Source: Data View, the Home Office’s single source of Office for National Statistics compliant monthly snapshot corporate human resources data Period Covered: Figures are as at 31 March each year.

    Extraction Date: 1st April each year

    Organisational Coverage: March-10 – Figures include core Home Office and the Executive Agencies; United Kingdom Border Agency, Identity and Passport Service and the Criminal Records Bureau March -15 – Figures include core Home Office (including Border Force, UK Visas & Immigration, Immigration En-forcement and Her Majesty’s Passport Office.) Employee Coverage: Data is based on headcount and FTE of all current paid and unpaid civil servants as at 31st March each year

  • Tristram Hunt – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    Tristram Hunt – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department for Education

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Tristram Hunt on 2016-02-24.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Education, how many and which local authorities have notified her Department about plans to dispose of grant-funded assets through the (a) sale, (b) transfer and (c) change of use of children’s centres under the requirements of the Sure Start Early Years and Childcare Grant.

    Mr Sam Gyimah

    Where local authorities dispose of or change the use of buildings or other assets funded wholly or partly through Sure Start capital grants, they must repay the money through the claw-back process.

    The Department for Education has a thorough set of monitoring arrangements in place regarding claw-back rules. Local authorities are required to notify the department of each and every proposed change of services and provide details about the level of early years services that are to continue. The department then considers if the local authority has continued to offer a sufficient level of early years services for children and their families from the building in question to meet the original aims of the grant.

    If the department is satisfied that the funding for the asset will continue to be used for purposes consistent with the grant, the department may defer claw-back. Deferring claw-back means that we accept the change of usage at that time, however, the department retains its interest in the asset and if in the future the asset has its usage changed, is transferred or otherwise disposed of, and does not continue to meet the purposes of the grant the local authority must inform the department and we will claw-back the funding. The department’s interest in an asset funded by Sure Start capital grants is 25 years from designation of the building. If the grant was used to purchase capital items or re-furbish an existing asset, the length of time and value of any claw-back depends on the depreciation value of the items, according to local authority depreciation rules.

  • Tristram Hunt – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    Tristram Hunt – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Cabinet Office

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Tristram Hunt on 2016-04-15.

    To ask the Minister for the Cabinet Office, how many jobs in (a) his Department and (b) each of his Department’s non-departmental public bodies, executive agencies, non-ministerial departments, advisory bodies and other accountable statutory bodies (i) have been abolished in or relocated from East Cheshire Local Authority since 2010 and (ii) will be abolished in or relocated from East Cheshire Local Authority by 2020.

    Matthew Hancock

    None.

  • Tristram Hunt – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    Tristram Hunt – 2016 Parliamentary Question to the Department of Health

    The below Parliamentary question was asked by Tristram Hunt on 2016-09-06.

    To ask the Secretary of State for Health, what recent assessment he has made of the potential merits of making selective dorsal rhizotomy surgery available on the NHS for young people with cerebral palsy.

    David Mowat

    NHS England currently has in place a programme called Commissioning through Evaluation (CtE). This is designed to enable a limited number of patients to access treatments that are not funded by the National Health Service, but nonetheless show significant promise for the future, while new clinical and patient experience data are collected within a formal evaluation programme. The benefits of Selective Dorsal Rhizotomy (SDR) procedures are currently being assessed through this scheme.

    The SDR CtE is supported in five designated hospital trusts across the country. There are two main phases for any treatments entered into NHS England’s CtE programme. The first phase of the SDR CtE concluded in March 2016. During this phase a predetermined number of patients were recruited within a few selected centres across England and a formal evaluation programme was established.

    The second phase – the analysis phase – has now commenced. Once the CtE evaluation report is available, NHS England’s published policy for access to SDR will be reviewed. NHS England expects to receive an evaluation report in March 2017.

  • Tristram Hunt – 2010 Maiden Speech in the House of Commons

    Below is the text of the maiden speech made by Tristram Hunt, the Labour MP for Stoke-on-Trent Central, in the House of Commons on 6 July 2010.

    It is a great privilege to be called in this important debate to make my maiden speech and to be the first to congratulate the hon. Member for Harrow East (Bob Blackman) on his wonderful maiden speech, his description of the multicultural Mecca of Harrow and his generous comments about his predecessor, Tony McNulty, which many Labour Members share. Let me pay my tribute to my esteemed predecessor, Mark Fisher, who sat in the House for 27 years and conscientiously, effectively and passionately represented the interests of Stoke-on-Trent Central.

    Mark’s connections to the Potteries began, improbably enough, when he was writing film scripts in Staffordshire Moorlands—an ambitious venture at the best of times in California, even more so in the Roaches of north Staffordshire. He then stood for Staffordshire Moorlands ​and was selected to succeed Bob Cant in Stoke-on-Trent—all the while as an old Etonian son of a Tory MP. People in the Potteries are, as I have discovered, enormously forgiving of one’s past.

    Mark’s maiden speech to the House in 1983 was a heartfelt lament at the state of the national health service in north Staffordshire owing to sustained underfunding. He spoke of old buildings, outdated operating theatres, waiting lists for general and orthopaedic surgery of more than 12 months. Now, after 13 years of good Labour Government, that decline has been reversed and Stoke-on-Trent has a brand new £370 million university teaching hospital, springing up around the old City General—it is the first new hospital for 130 years. In addition, we have new GP surgeries, walk-in centres and marked improvements in public health.

    Mark was also highly active in the House, working closely with Tony Wright on reforms to the workings of Parliament, the all-party parliamentary history group, which, in a different incarnation, I once had the pleasure to address and was mildly surprised at the intimate knowledge of the right hon. Member for Hitchin and Harpenden (Mr Lilley) of dialectical materialism and the life of Friedrich Engels.

    Mark also made a contribution to the management of the art collection in the palace. He was, indeed, an Arts Minister in 1997 and formed part of the heroic team in the Department for Culture, Media and Sport that delivered a great Labour pledge of free entry to Britain’s museums for the people of Britain. As his successor, I will be watching closely the incoming Administration’s commitment to honour that pledge. It is now my great privilege to take up his place in Parliament.

    In an excellent maiden speech, my hon. Friend the Member for Derby North (Chris Williamson) made an ambitious play for his city being the birthplace of the industrial revolution. While I am a deep admirer of the Derby silk mill and the Derby arboretum, and even the Derwent valley, we all know that the historic, earth-shattering event—the dawn of modernity, the dawn of industrialisation—began in my constituency with the opening of Josiah Wedgwood’s factory in Etruria, near Shelton, in 1769. Since the 1770s, Stoke-on-Trent has become the premier global brand-name for ceramics.

    In a recent programme of his excellent series “A History of the World in 100 Objects”, British Museum director Neil MacGregor described the fact that

    “human history is told and written in pots… more than in anything else.”

    He went on to quote Robert Browning:

    “Time’s wheel runs back or stops; potter and clay endure.”

    At the heart of the English enlightenment, and indeed global civilisation, Stoke-on-Trent makes its place in history, but out of the six towns has emerged more than just pottery—from the rise of primitive Methodism to the works of Arnold Bennett, from the football of Stanley Matthews to the lyricism of Robbie Williams and the social justice politics of Jack Ashley.

    The area has also faced profound challenges, and to be frank, globalisation has knocked the north Staffs economy sideways. Cheap labour in east Asia sparked a freefall in ceramics employment, the steel industry could not compete with China or India, and Michael Heseltine did for the last of our coal mines.​

    This process of economic dislocation—when “All That Is Solid Melts Into Air”— has by no means ended, but there are signs of hope. A vibrant university quarter is springing up around Staffordshire university. Onshoring is seeing the return of ceramics jobs to Stoke-on-Trent, while a new generation of designer-makers, led by the likes of Emma Bridgewater, are creating high-value, high-design, locally rooted companies. The Portmeirion business, which produces the iconic Spode designs, is successfully growing from its Stoke base, exporting to Europe, America and South Korea.

    However, we have much to do in rebuilding our engineering supply chain, raising skills levels across the constituency and exploiting the human capital of Stoke-on-Trent. While we welcome the Government’s commitment to rebalancing the British economy, perhaps the best way to do that is not to begin by cutting the regional development agency funds or the Building Schools for the Future programme.

    My seat is an old if not ancient one. It has a proud pedigree. Born of the Great Reform Act of 1832, of which the Deputy Prime Minister is now such a student, it was first represented in this place by Josiah Wedgwood, the son of the potter. Wedgwood was a liberal—in the proper sense of the word. Like his father, he was committed to the abolitionist cause and was a stalwart of the anti-slavery movement. It was a great pleasure to have seen that spirit reawaken in the general election this year as my constituents sent the racist, reactionary and frequently criminal British National party packing.

    However, Stoke-on-Trent also knows that change has to be matched with continuity, and my constituents share a deep apprehension over the Government’s ill-thought-out plans for constitutional reform. They want to know that when a Government fail to win a vote of confidence, Parliament can be dissolved by 50% plus one vote, rather than the absurdity of the 55% self-protecting ordinance.

    Then we come to the five-year Parliament—again, a retrospective, constitutional fix to get this Government through some muddy waters, and that is before we get on to flooding of the House of Lords with new Members, redrawing the boundaries, leaving 3.2 million voters off the register and underfunding the individual registration scheme. However, my hon. Friends and I will come back to those issues in the coming weeks. In the meantime, I simply thank the House for the indulgence of this, my maiden speech, on the Gracious Speech.

  • Tristram Hunt – 2014 Speech on Schooling for the Future

    Below is the text of the speech made by Tristram Hunt, the Shadow Secretary of State for Education, on 12th February 2014.

    THE VALUE OF SCHOOLING

    Thank you.

    I would like to begin by thanking Andrew and AQA for organising this conference on a very important theme. They are at the forefront of developing new ways to make assessment imaginative, rigorous and deliverable – which, as we know, can sometimes be challenging in the creative subjects.

    It is also a great pleasure to be here at the Institute of Education, an institution established in that golden period of London’s history – the heroic phase of municipal socialism under the LCC.

    Dockers’ leader and London County Councillor John Burns put it best, when he said that what he and his fellow Progressives were struggling for was ‘a revived municipal ideal’; the goals of the LCC were ‘to do for all what private enterprise does for a few.  It is the conscious ordering of the city, through ownership of public services, of its own comfort, happiness, and destiny.’

    For with the nuts and bolts of municipal socialism – the trams and the public health – came a commitment to learning, art and recreation.  By 1907 over £10,000 p.a. was spent on some 1,200 summer concerts.  The LCC Chair, Lord Meath, thought the council should offer music ‘of a high and noble character’, because such music served an educational purpose and could ‘be brought to bear in a very agreeable manner on large masses of people.’

    These themes of education, creativity and character are what I want to touch on today.

    In recent weeks I have been setting out how teaching and learning fits in with the Labour Party’s wider purpose of building a strong society and a growing economy.

    From Michael Barber to Andreas Schleicher, respected educationalists have repeatedly pointed out that no education system can exceed the quality of its teachers.

    So that is our starting point: we believe that raising the status, elevating the standing and enhancing the standards of the teaching profession is the surest way to improve our children’s attainment and give them the start in life they deserve.

    However, today I want to talk to you about the institutions of change – schools – and argue that the demands of the 21st century will require charting a markedly different approach to schooling.

    Because though my first priority as Education Secretary in the next Labour Government would be to make sure we have ‘a world class teacher in every classroom’ I realise that it will not be enough just to raise the quality of individual teachers.

    Evidence from disciplines such as organisational psychology and economic geography shows that collaboration is crucial to innovation and creativity.

    So I begin from the premise that we should celebrate the fact we educate our children in a supportive social environment; that there is something intrinsically valuable in schools as dedicated learning communities – where young people learn from each other in addition to the foundations of knowledge from teachers.

    This is not a banal declaration – such is the awesome technological power being unleashed by the internet that it will not be too long before somebody proposes an institution-less model of schooling.

    Indeed, one only has to look at the popularity of Massive Open Online Courses to imagine how that might look.

    Yet one of the many attractions of Ed Miliband’s ‘One Nation’ approach to our politics is a revival of an older argument that everything of value is not reducible to price.

    Real value, as John Ruskin wrote in Unto this Last, “depends on the moral sign attached…. There is no wealth but life”.

    And for the Labour Party, the value of schooling, its social ethos and its moral purpose, is immeasurable.

    What is more, this is far more important than the name emblazoned upon the school gates. Indeed, beyond some fundamental prerequisites necessary to raise standards – autonomy with local oversight, good leadership, financial transparency and qualified teachers – we are not overly interested in passing judgement on different school types.

    What exercises us is a school’s quality, its ethos and the values of schooling we want our education system to embody.

    Yet to preserve these values in our brave new, digitally enhanced world we need to re-emphasise two fundamental educational capabilities that are in serious danger of being crowded out.

    These qualities are, I believe, vitally important in preparing young people for the economy of the future.

    They are important in our push to raise academic attainment and deliver educational excellence for all.

    But most of all they are important because they are valuable in terms of the type of education we want our young people to enjoy in order to reach their fullest potential.

    They are: character and creativity.

    CHARACTER IN THE CLASSROOM

    Let me start first with character. And not just because, “The historian’s first task is the elucidation of character”.

    No rather I start with character because I believe that is where schools should also start.

    Because it seems to me that sometimes the managerial, target-driven performance culture that has permeated our education system in recent years, can threaten the social ethos of schooling we hold so dear.

    Do not mistake me: I am zealot for minimum standards, rigorous assessment and intelligent accountability.

    I am supportive of a dynamic and interventionist Ofsted, tasked with a commitment to rooting out underperformance wherever it lies.

    But as with so many things we need to strike a balance.

    And if we choose to focus upon exam results and league tables to the detriment of everything else, then surely we are guilty of misunderstanding the purpose and nature of education?

    We should begin then with a deeper question: what do we want for and from our young people?

    First and foremost, the Labour Party wants young people who are equipped with the academic or vocational skills they require to succeed in an ever more competitive global market-place.

    More than that, we want young people who are confident, determined and resilient; young people who display courage, compassion, honesty, integrity, fairness, perseverance, emotional intelligence, grit and self-discipline.

    We want our young people to have a sense of moral purpose and character, as well as to be enquiring, reflective and passionate learners.

    Of course saying that character should be the focus of schooling is the easy part. The trickier question is how do we deliver it?

    However, this is where it gets really interesting. Because emerging research from people like Professor James Heckman at the University of Chicago and Professor James Arthur at the University of Birmingham clearly demonstrates that character can be taught.

    And as the excellent manifesto published yesterday by the All Party Group for Social Mobility demonstrates, there is a burgeoning debate about how best we can do that.

    But what is clear is that this is about more than bolting-on some music lessons or sports clubs to the school day. “No, this is about learning from the rigorous academic discipline that is character education and implementing a holistic approach that goes beyond extra-curricular activities and into the classroom.

    So I am calling upon initial teacher training providers to  include character education in initial teacher training.

    And we should encourage all schools to embed character education and resilience across their curriculum.

    Of course this focus harks back to some ancient educational ideals. From the Stoics, Plato and Aristotle, to Milton, Samuel Smiles and the Arnolds; for more than 2000 years schooling has been primarily concerned with the formation of character.

    ‘The noblest heraldry of Man,’ as Smiles called it – ‘that which forms the conscience of society, and creates and forms its best motive power.’

    As Matthew Arnold – a truly independent schools inspector – wrote, schools should be seen “not as a mere machine for teaching, reading, writing and arithmetic, but as a living whole with complex functions, religious, moral and intellectual.”

    Indeed, the 2002 Education Act required the National Curriculum to “promote the spiritual, moral, cultural, mental and physical development of pupils at the school and of society”.

    So we do not have to look too far into the distant past to a find a time when such values were promoted.

    Yet, I would argue that the contemporary context makes the cultivation of character even more important.

    One only has to look at, for example, the research of Professor Avner Offer at Oxford University, to find a persuasive argument that ‘the flow of novelty’ in contemporary society is so strong that higher levels of commitment, discipline and self-control are needed to ensure that long-term wellbeing is not repeatedly sacrificed upon the altar of short-term gratification.

    Our young people grow up in complex times. Incidents of mental illness appear to be rising, technology and social media appear to be making it more difficult to concentrate for long periods, whilst some might argue that respect for education itself is in decline.

    The benefits of delayed gratification, attentiveness and patience must be more clearly articulated.

    Moreover, research clearly shows that vulnerable and disadvantaged young people are far more likely to deal with the consequences of failure and setbacks in a negative way.

    Character is not best taught through adversity – its study belongs in the supportive, dedicated and aspirational communities that the best schools provide.

    Now I am not the kind of politician to tell professionals how to do their job – how many lines pupils should write or litter they should pick up.

    But what I hope I am doing is using my position as a democratically elected politician – and aspirant Secretary of State – to indicate what matters to a forthcoming Labour government and what evidence is available to endorse it.

    By prioritising character, moral purpose and the education of well-rounded individuals as well as academic attainment, the Labour Party is demonstrating its commitment to taking some of those deeper cultural challenges head on.

    CREATIVITY IN THE CURRICULUM

    But character is not the only virtue we need to re-emphasise in a contemporary vision of schooling.

    We need to keep working on developing creativity in our schools too.

    Let’s start with some cold hard economic facts.

    Our creative industries are worth £36 billion a year to our economy, employing 1.5m people, and generating around 10% of our total exports.

    Moreover, they currently represent the fastest growing sector in the economy; they are a vital conduit of our soft-power right around the world.

    We are the country of Danny Boyle, Harry Potter, Adele, Robbie Williams, EL James and Stella McCartney.

    We have remarkable reservoirs of creativity in our DNA.  And so there is a pretty basic economic argument for encouraging creativity in the curriculum.

    However, once more it is technology that makes this increasingly imperative.

    We know that digital revolution has made the entire history of human achievement.

    We know too that this globalisation of knowledge that opens up enormous possibilities for creativity and innovation both economically and educationally.

    But what might not be so well known is that this is already changing the way we work – a recent study by Princeton University showed a sharp increase in the workplace demand for non-routine analytic and interactive skills. Employers reported that they needed people who were innovative, flexible, creative team-players.

    We have seen this too in the emergence of the STEAM agenda, which recognises the economic importance of the arts in education as well as science, technology, engineering and maths.

    As Steve Jobs famously said: “It is in Apple’s DNA that technology alone is not enough. It’s technology married with liberal arts, married with the humanities that yields the results that make our hearts sing”.

    And whilst I do not agree with everything Sir Ken Robinson says, his definition of creativity – that it is “the process of having original ideas that have value” – makes it crystal clear why it is so relevant to a modern economy.

    Yet the truth is that preparing our children for the jobs of the future is an even more daunting challenge. As Andreas Schleicher of the OECD has said:

    “Because of rapid economic and social change, schools have to prepare students for jobs that have not yet been created, technologies that have not yet been invented and problems that we don’t yet know will arise.”

    That is why from 2015 the OECD will start testing collaborative problem-solving alongside reading, maths and science in the next round of PISA assessments.

    Of course that does not mean undermining the importance of knowledge.

    I want to make it absolutely clear that I would never give an inch on getting the academic basics right.

    Literacy and numeracy skills are vital 21st century skills, fundamental to the life chances of all young people. Particularly the disadvantaged.

    Furthermore, as the work of Daniel T Willingham from the University of Virginia has shown, there is a vital relationship between critical thinking and knowledge.

    Thought processes are intertwined with what is being thought about.  Knowledge enhances cognitive processes like problem solving and reasoning.

    However, again it is question of striking the right balance. And in practically every other country, ‘broad’ educational frameworks are currently being drawn up that, in the words of former US Secretary of State Condoleeza Rice, “combine a mix of ‘old-fashioned skills and knowledge’, such as numeracy and literacy, with ‘twenty-first-century’ skills”.

    And uppermost in the vast majority of 21st century skill frameworks? Creativity and innovation.

    So, I am encouraged that the Government has made a step in the right direction with its focus on the ‘Best Eight’ of subjects for GCSE bench-marking.

    However, right across the new curriculum proposals we are seeing a narrowing of assessment criteria, with an emphasis on the theoretical over the practical and the creative.

    Geography fieldwork, practical lab-work in science, extended projects; the speaking and listening component of English GCSE; and the practical elements of music and art – all of these are under threat, which can only impact negatively upon young people’s development as rounded, inquiring, creative individuals.

    However, what really concerns me with this narrowing of the scope of education may actually begin to affect attainment in core subjects such as English and Maths.

    Because there is a growing body of evidence to suggest that not only do creative subjects have a positive impact on young person’s overall development but that they actually boost attainment across the board.

    The imagination and visualisation skills inherent in drawing, painting and the visual arts have been shown to help writing skills and the interpretation of texts.

    Representing Stoke-on-Trent I am particularly taken by studies showing that the dexterity of medical surgeons benefit from working with clay.

    Music has been found to have strong connections to improving spatial reasoning and understanding complex mathematical concepts.

    This should not surprise us – in the real world information is interwoven, layered and sophisticated. It is not experienced in isolated subject blocks.

    So, just as with character, a broad and balanced education requires that creativity is embedded right across the curriculum.

    NO SURRENDER ON STANDARDS

    Of course absolutely vital to delivering on this promise will be a highly qualified, self-motivating and dedicated teaching profession.

    And the changing economic and educational necessities only further demonstrate the importance of regular professional development, of making sure that teachers’ skills and knowledge are up-to-date with the latest pedagogical and technological expertise.

    That, as I have said, is the surest way to raise standards in our schools.

    Nevertheless, there may be those who say that a contemporary vision of schooling which stresses character and creativity alongside attainment is a surrender on standards.

    Let me say very clearly: I see absolutely no reason why we need to make a choice between taking academic rigour seriously or developing character and creativity.

    As Andreas Schleicher from the OECD made clear when he presented the PISA survey in December, success in the 21st century will depend as much upon what you can do with what you know, as what you know.

    And I have seen this creativity at work in the sports ethos of Sir Thomas Telford City Technology College; the Hairspray rehearsals at the Ormiston Sir Stanley Matthews Academy; and the rich, glorious displays of children’s artwork on the walls of St Mary’s Redcliffe, Bristol and Divine Mercy Roman Catholic School, Manchester.

    They have shown the ethos, excellence and culture of high expectations we want to see spread to all schools.

    And as any employer will tell you – outstanding qualifications, on their own, are no guarantee of the wider aptitudes required for the world of work.

    So preparing our young people, equipping them with the character and creativity needed to succeed in this most demanding and competitive of centuries, is an essential partner to raising standards.

    Literacy and numeracy, creativity and character – these are the themes we want to pursue in office.

    It speaks to our tradition within the Labour movement and to the modern demands of a global economy.

    And it has been done in the past.  Let me end by returning to the past.

    In 1936, the Mayor of West Ham looked back on the great era of municipal socialism in London:  In my early days there were no municipal recreation grounds or playing fields: no municipal college, secondary, central, special, open air or nursery schools; no municipal libraries, baths, tramways or electricity undertakings; no municipal hospitals, maternity and child welfare clinics or school medical clinics.  Truly there has been a wonderful growth of educational and public health services: those twin handmaidens, which have brought to our citizens healthier, happier and longer lives.

    Education as the handmaiden of a healthier, happier and longer life – that seems to me a worthy ambition.