No song for Labour?

Traditionally, the Labour Party conference used to end in song. Historically, it was the Red Fag that was belted out by delegates, many of whom had learn to sing both in school and in church, chapel or other place of worship. Go to a funeral or a wedding these days, and singing is often either desultory or non-existent, except for a few brave souls. Partly, this is down to the decline in attendance at organised worship, but partly, especially for weddings, it may be down to the decline in music teaching in schools.

Yesterday, I was told of an initiative to revive school choirs https://www.cloreduffield.org.uk/clore-school-choirs-and-singing-programme

However, it will take more than a few philanthropic gestures to revive music in our schools. The subject has now reached a crisis point in state schools across England. I don’t expect the number of new trainees to meet the DfE’s target this autumn. Sadly, It is not as if missing the ITT target in music is something new.

ITT census% of target recruited
2019/2080
2020/21122
2021/2271
2022/2362
2023/2427
2024/2540
2025/2565

My expectation for the 2025/26 outcome is somewhere between 80-85% based upon September acceptance numbers through the DfE recruitment to ITT portal data published yesterday – see my previous two posts for more details.

The improvement to around 80% is because the target for this September has been reduced by the DfE from a high of 820 trainees needed in 2024/25, to a new low of 260 two years later for the 2026/27 intake.

ITT target2021/222022/232023/242024/252025/262026/27
Music540470790820565260

In part, the reduction in the target is the result of not adding unfilled places in one year to the target for the next year. That was a policy I have always said, since it was tried in the 1990s, was a mistake. Schools cannot absorb more than a certain number of teachers each year, and they always start the autumn term fully staffed for the timetable that they have produced.

Change the timetable, and cut an examination subject, and a school is unlikely to offer it the following year in its options package, especially if it might not recruit a teacher needed to teach the subject, and someone else might need to make way for the restoration of the subject to the timetable. Once gone, it is hard to recover without a change in policy.

Of course, falling rolls will mean a reduction in demand for teachers, assuming school funding doesn’t improve – quite likely, and that retention remains at current levels – also likely with a faltering graduate job market. But is the cut to 260 places for music, a cut that would certainly justify the removal of the bursary sensible? The DfE seem to think so, after having run the Teacher Supply Model, based upon current input data. I am less sure.

So far in 2026, there have been over 500 vacancies for teachers of music and heads of department, so by year-end in December that total might have increased to somewhere between 550-600 vacancies across the year in state schools.

How does that compare to possible supply? In 2025/26 the ITT census recorded 367 music trainees. Allowing for wastage, both in-course and post-course that might reduce the available number to less than 300 or about 50% of vacancies, leaving the other 300 to be filled from returners or other sources.

MusicITT census
2013/14380
2014/15375
2015/16355
2016/17355
2017/18295
2018/19300
2019/20320
2020/21483
2021/22390
2022/23301
2023/24214
2024/25345
2025/26367
estimate2026/27240

With the reduced target of 260, the likely outcome, based on the September offer number is for around 230 trainees at the end of the year, with less than 200 available to work in the state sector in 2027, based on past trends.

Vacancies would need to fall by around 200 in 2027 for that number of new teachers to take up half the vacancies. If vacancies were to remain at 600, admittedly an upper estimate, then new entrants to the labour market might only be able to fill a third of vacancies. This would be grim news, and leaves me with two conclusions

The Teacher Supply Model has cut targets too far too soon

The removal of the bursary has affected recruitment, but the effect has been masked by the cut to the ITT target.

In the real world, unless I am wrong, fewer children will study music from September 2027/28 onwards – that’s the next school-year.

Is that what the government wants? I don’t know, but I do know that there is a risk of music disappearing as an examination subject unless more music teachers are recruited.

I was told, an unverified number, of just 190 entries in the North East Region for music at A level this summer. How many of those were from private schools? I will see what I can find out from the published statistics.

Music is changing, but that change won’t happen nor will music continue to support growth in the economy through orchestras, popular music and other trends if we let music die in the majority of state schools.

A world where music is created by Artificial Intelligence and not by humans, will be a less enjoyable place in which to live.

The ITT Census versus September acceptances

In my previous post, I said at the end of the post that  I would look at what any differences between the August ITT acceptance data issued by the DfE earlier today, and the ITT census to be issued in December 2026 might be, by looking at the difference between those accepted in September 2025 and the ITT Census of December 2025.

In reality, this task has proved something more  of a challenge that I had expected. This is mostly because of the late announcement of the targets for September 2026. These were not announced until April 2026, by which time many subjects had already made offers in excess of the new, and lower, targets. The fact that the targets for 2026 were in many subjects drastically reduced has made the analysis almost impossible.

Because of the reduction in the targets, it is possible that the outcome of the 2026 ITT Census could be the best year in terms of hitting targets since 2012, especially once Teach First and any other non-DfE portal recruitment is factored into the census.

However, there are a few subjects that rely almost entirely upon the DfE portal for recruitment that we now know are very unlikely to meet even the revised target for September 2026.

These are: Business Studies; Classics, Drama; Religious Education and the catch-all ‘Other’ that includes media and communication studies, social studies, citizenship and psychology.

Although how the ‘other’ subjects grouping reaches a target of 2,035 places remains a bit of a mystery. As I have advocated elsewhere, it is now time to breakdown the ’other category’ into its component subject targets to allow for meaningful discussions about teacher supply. With around one in eight places in the ‘other’ category and the category recruiting very poorly it is time for a more meaningful discussion about the classifications used by the DfE for its IIT targets.

A reminder of how the targets have changed this year when compared to the previous year

2025/262026/27
Total26,92020,800
PrimaryTotal7,650 5,520
SecondaryTotal19,270 15,280
Art and Design680605
Biology985675
Business Studies9001,200
Chemistry730690
Classics6075
Computing895565
Design and Technology965620
Drama620370
English1,9501,980
Geography935685
History790520
Mathematics2,3002,000
Modern Foreign Languages1,4601,085
Music565260
Others2,5202,035
Physical Education725655
Physics1,410810
Religious Education780450

 Some years ago, the total was nearer 40,000 trainees, so this has been a dramatic reduction.

When were secondary trainee targets last as low as 15,280? Not for some time. I will do  a search and see if I can find out the last time the targets were this low for both primary and secondary trainees. As these targets now include almost all routes, it will be interesting to see whether when they were last this low were there no ‘off target’ numbers such as the former employment-based routes?  

Mixed results across the ITT targets this September

Earlier this year, (in April) the DfE slashed the targets for new trainee teachers, citing falling rolls. In some case, this won’t have made a difference because either the new target was still unattainable or those in ITT had already exceeded the new target, and presumably couldn’t or wouldn’t withdraw offers already made.

So, what does the landscape look like this September, now that the DfE has released the data that will be close to the final outcomes for courses, at least those recruiting through the DfE portal. The Teach First, and other such programmes must be added to the data. However, before the ITT census there will undoubtedly be some dropouts or no-shows to courses. As a result, the September numbers accepted should provide a good idea of the basis for calculating the number of new teachers emerging onto the state school labour market for September 2027. (Take of 6% for in-course-wastage, and then 15-20% of the remainder for those not wanting to teaching state schools – these are conservative percentages). This means there may well be shortages in some subjects, especially the arts that Labour seemed to want to espouse, as the table shows.

The final percentages for mathematics and physics may well depend upon how many overseas students can obtain a visa, firstly to study and then to work in England?

It really is time to open up what the DfE means by ‘others’, and include some more actual subjects in the list. Computing may be the first subject to be benefitting from concern over the loss of jobs to AI.

I very much doubt  whether the total for music, biology, religious education, design and technology, geography and English will be enough to meet the needs of schools in 2027. Rolls across the country just are not falling that fast, whatever is happening in London.

I am not sure what the DfE has calculated for the effects oof VAT on the private school sector, but if numbers fell in that sector, the sector would need to recruit fewer teachers. This would only have an impact if it was a reduction in overseas student numbers, as, presumably, home students would transfer into the state system, requiring more teachers, even at the worse pupil-teacher ratio of the state sector.

Where are acceptances down on last year?

Applications submitted were 62,633 this year, compared with 55,637 last year. However, accepted numbers were down from 26,714 to 24,850 meaning an increase of more than 4,000                                           applicants rejected.

The number of acceptances fell across all age groups, larger falls were in the age-groups normally associated with career switchers, and there were relatively small falls for new graduates. This is encouraging news for the long-term health of the profession, as younger trainees that stay the course should provide for the cadre of future leaders.

Most of the fall in acceptances were of females: down from 17,918 to 16,189, with males just declining from 8,516 to 8,382. This may reflect the greater number of females that apply for primary sector courses.

More worrying is the fact that while acceptances from ‘rest of the world’ applicants remained steady at 1,440 this year compared with 1,428 last year, most UK regions witnessed a decline in acceptances.  There were 9,661 acceptances for primary phase courses compared with 9,887 last year, while secondary phase acceptances declined from 16,829 to 15,190.

Apprenticeships bucked the trend, witnessing more acceptances (1,453 against 1,310 for PG and 261 against 198 for degree apprenticeships). Salaried route acceptances slumped from 618 to just 304, presumably as a result of the apprenticeship route, which may be cheaper for schools.

Finally, all training provider regions witnessed a decline in acceptances, with fewer than 1,000 trainees across the North East region being accepted ( 911 compared with 1,078 last year).

If I have time, I will compare the 2026 September acceptances with   census to measure whether there is any significant amount of change between the two datasets.

Vocational education: Closing doors or widening opportunities?

The education of young people has had quite an airing over the past week. At the Liberal Democrats conference, Munira Wilson MP, the Party’s Education spokesperson at Westminster, gave a platform speech that foreshadowed the announcement by Lucy Powell, the Secretary of State, about post-14 vocational education.

You can see Munira’s speech on YouTube. I suggest starting at 1 hour 38 minutes into the video lib dem conference 2026 autumn saturday afternoon session – Search

In her speech, Munira raised one of the key dilemmas of education. How to promote ambition without encouraging many young people to leave their communities to seek to achieve their ambitions? Many that leave our rural and coastal communities (the source of another debate at the conference) to fulfil an educational ambition, often at university, never return.

I believe that governments should be encouraging these young people to return and set up businesses in rural and coastal communities as part of regeneration schemes.

Labour’s,  Lucy Powell’s, focus was one the perennial issue within the British education system: how to resolve classroom and practical subjects at examination level in terms of parity of esteem? Labour answer is to recreate courses for 14-16 year olds in practical subjects, such as construction, care and business. New Vocational GCSEs unveiled in major shake-up to hands-on learning for teens – GOV.UK

In 2003, I wrote a paper for the Liberal Democrats entitled ‘No child left behind’ – a phrase borrowed from US President Bush – in which I advocated a 14-18 sector. I recognised that many young people at 14 were disillusioned with school, but might be brought back into education if they were offered courses more aligned with their career ambitions. Now, I understand Munira’s point that at 14 she wanted to be a teacher, but as a graduate went into a different career. Munira no doubt already wanted to go to university at 14.

But, what of those, the Newsom 50%, Half Our Future: A tribute to Sir John Newsom’s Report | John Howson  that don’t aspire to stay in education. At what age should we help them on the path to a working life? In 2003, I suggested links with further education, and its more grown- up approach and better facilities than many schools can provide for practical courses.

Labour’s announcement this week, ahead of their conference, seemed a bit rushed. Nothing about where to find the staff to teach  these new vocational subjects in schools? Nothing about the issue of ‘norm’ referencing in examinations. How do you ‘norm reference’ the building of a wall in a construction class or the creation of a meal in a hospitality course? Trying to create national standards will be a real challenge.

Both Munira, and then Lucy Powell, did speak about the need for more work experience in schools. Again, this is something that I support wholeheartedly, but again how do we deal with the limited opportunities in our rural and coastal communities? As so often in education, it will come down to who will pay for the transport?

However, NEETs are not just an education issue. Any government that is responsible for an economy that is not producing jobs for either young people of those made redundant in their 40s and 50s, has two choices, either benefits or some form of education and training provision, if it wants to keep down the numbers unemployed. With AI likely to recreate the job scene in a new format, the issue of the relationship between education and employment isn’t going to go away anytime soon.

Schools in rural and coastal areas: issues and concerns

Today was the first day of the Liberal Democrats annual conference. This year it is being held in Brighton. A motion today was about rural and coastal education and the need to recognise the issues children and young people living in these areas face.

I was privileged to be call to speak in the debate. What follows is the text of my speech: for what I actually said, please go to the recording at: Autumn Conference 2026 – Saturday Morning – YouTube at 1:22:10 for the next 4 minutes.

Rural & Coastal Education

Conference, I have sympathy with this motion but, while like all of you I know what ‘rural’ means, I am less sure about what ‘coastal’ means. Does the term include cities such as Liverpool, Hull and Brighton, and are they markedly different to Manchester, Sheffield and Birmingham? As a one-time geography teacher, I need to think carefully about what are the locations such a place-based policy might exclude.

Sadly, the motion doesn’t have much our MPs can campaign on. So, here’s three ideas linked to the spirit of the motion for them to campaign upon and that voters will understand.

Raise the free Home to school transport age  to 18 to bring it into line with the learning leaving age. This will end the cliff edge at 16. Ensure everyone can get to college to study the course they want. Raising the £1 fare maximum age from 16 to 21 would be a start.

Importantly, revise the 2006 Education Act to include Academies or watch Academy Trusts close schools without any controls.

Look at taxation, such as motor insurance tax for those in rural and coastal areas forced by a lack of public transport to use a moped or car, but too young to have any ‘no claims bonus’. This tax is a penalty on learning for these young people, and a real disincentive to study.

Finally, much of both local authority and parent’s school transport cash goes back to the government in taxation. Urban authorities don’t pay this fuel tax, and neither should rural areas.

Living in a rural area should not mean a tax on learning for young people. Ater all, they don’t have a choice.

Conference on education, The message is simple, the message is clear, the message is from the Liberal Democrats:

Equal access to Education for Everyone.

Please support the motion.

The motion was passed both by the audience in the hall and the delegates following on-line.

Is the Teachers’ Pay Award fully funded or not?

Earlier this week, the Secretary of State wrote to the National Education Union(NEU)  about funding for the Teachers Pay Settlement. I cannot find the text of the letter on the DfE’s website, but the NEU helpfully stated that:

The NEU has secured through negotiations with the Secretary of State for Education a fully funded pay increase for all teachers throughout England. This is a significant step. In a letter to the General Secretary of the NEU Lucy Powell outlined her proposals for funding alongside a willingness to address issues around accountability, workload, and well-being. NEU secures from Government full funding for teacher pay offer | National Education Union

Since then, doubts have been cast upon whether there is enough money for a ‘fully funded’ pay rise for all teachers. Given that the NEU was considering industrial action over pay, this statement looked like a real win for the Union.

However, this announcement was never likely to create produce a ‘fully funded’ pay increase because of the manner in which the National Funding Formula for schools operates. Schools have different mixes of staff salaries, some have many inexperienced teachers near the bottom of the main scale, whereas other schools have many long-serving teachers at the top of the Upper Pay Spine. Schools also differ in how they reward additional activities with Teaching and Learning responsibility points (TLRs). The Formula cannot take these differences into account.

Asa result, some schools would be more than fully funded and other left still needing to find the rest of the pay award.

Subsequently, it seems that the DfE assumed that the funding for the pay award will come for the saving schools experience as a result of the reduction in the employer’s contribution to the non-teaching staff pension scheme: the LGPS. That seems like wishful thinking to many commentators, including myself.

First there are a number of LGPS Pools, with different outcomes, and hence different rates of employer contribution. As a result, a school with a high percentage of staff at the top of the Upper Pay Spine, few support staff and located in an LGPS fund with one of the higher contribution rates will fare far less well  from this announcement than a school with the opposite profile.

Also, making an announcement in September mean that every school budget is already set, and the only spare cash is in any ‘contingency’ line on the budget. The DfE should know that fact. As a result, this announcement looks like either something of a face-saving act or another of the Labour government’s gross miscalculations. Either way, it seems likely many schools, if not most, will have given only a faint cheer on hearing the announcement, if they managed to raise a cheer at all.

I am told that the DfE clawed back the savings from reductions in employers’ contributions to the Teachers Pension Scheme. Unlike LGPS, where there are real schemes, with investments than can go up and down, the TPS, like the Civil Service Pension Fund, doesn’t actually exist as a fund, but is held by The Treasury as a notional fund.

70 Up

Like many of my generation, I watched 70 Up on TV last night with very mixed feelings. I first came across what was originally an ITV World in Action documentary called ‘7 UP’ when lecturing to trainee teachers at Oxford Polytechnic, as Oxford Brookes University then was, in the 1980s. The film was part of a module called ‘Societal Issues in Education’. The original documentary was about the lives and aspirations of 20 different children selected by the producer from schools across England. Eventually, it became  series, revisiting the group every seven years.

Looking at the first part of 70 UP, the final two-part episode that both recalled the past lives of those willing to participate every seven years, and caught up with them for a final time at age 70, I was struck by what was missing from the series. No child with a visible disability, only a nod to even the possibility of multi-cultural Britian, as it already was becoming in 1964, when the original programme first aired. A group of children both very different from those that might be selected today, but in many ways a group still to be found in many schools today.

We have been privileged to share the lives of this particular group, and one must thank them for taking part in such a public recording of many aspects of their personal lives. Some played to the camera, and obviously enjoyed the experience; others didn’t, and dropped out, while others, while not enjoying the experience still participated.

What is striking, and heartwarming in the first part of 70 UP is the nature of relationships the group formed. Some survived, some didn’t. That’s not surprising, as the past 60 years have seen great changes in both divorce laws and the fluidity of relationships at all ages.

Every participant was a star. For many, the boy from the children’s home that went on to not only make a family with his partner, but also to foster 170 children in care, was a real star. Fostering demands real respect, as I know from my time as a county councillor just how difficult it is to recruit carers. If 70 UP persuades just one family to contact their local authority and offer to become carers it will have been worthwhile.

Not all the episodes were easy to watch, especially those filmed in the 1970s when teenagers were finding their feet. It is worth noting how many went to Oxford University, and that says much about the sampling, especially of the original participants from private schools.

The women in the group joined 7 UP before the equal opportunity’s legislation of the 1970s, and it shows in those that worked rather than had careers. There were also fewer of them, again I suspect a sign of the times and attitudes in the early 1960s, before the sexual revolution and the ‘swinging sixties’.

Next week, there will be the final part of the series. 70 UP had a new producer, the previous, and only other producer, died after 63 UP was produced. Not surprisingly, not all the original participants survived to 70.

Indeed, I worry, that the treatment of the death of one of the original group of participants reveals both the best and worst of television in its mission to entertain; inform and educate its viewers.

Social mobility and the far right

The announcement that that Social Mobility Commission is to be abolished was announced when I was on holiday. As a result, I have only just caught up with news of its demise – one of the few QUANGOs to escape previous culls. While the term ‘class’ for its replacement within the civil service may be more ‘in your face’ than ‘social mobility’, I suppose it fits better with the debate about ‘White working class boys’ that has featured in many discussions about educational attainment during the past decade.

I am sad to see the Commission abolished. Taking work back into government departments inevitably makes policy discussion less transparent, and places greater emphasis on the work of think tanks. The Commission has had something of a chequered history, as might be expected given its role and the fact that rt worked under a Conservative government for most of its life. I documented one such event in this blog post from 2017 Social Mobility Commission | John Howson that interestingly also mentioned AI, and the risk of the rise of the ‘far right’.

‘With the IT revolution once again picking up speed, and predications of massive job losses from the growth in Artificial Intelligence awakening the Luddite mentality in many of us, the Commission must act not only as the government’s conscience on social mobility, but also as a source of genuine new policies that are radical and forward thinking. More of the same just won’t work.

We have seen in Germany that the failure to ensure the success of the economy across the whole country has inevitably led to the rise of the far right in politics. Social mobility is important, but we cannot ignore those left behind. They must not become the poor relations kept, for ever, out of sight.’ Social Mobility Commission | John Howson Still, it is sad to see a Labour government abolish it.

I had a number of discussions with officials at the commission over the years, most notably about teacher supply matters. The following post followed the publication of one of the Commission’s reports in 2019  We cannot ignore those left behind | John Howson and also shows that, even under Conservative control, those of us from all political parties concerned about the issue of deprivation and education were able to have our voice heard: such is the value of good quality scrutiny.

One of the key outputs from the Social Mobility Commission was its annual State of the Nation Report. It will be a disappointment to lose that scrutiny, and I hope civil servants will either want to continue it or ask The Office for National Statistics to take it over. Here are a couple of links to my blog posts about the report:

Class rules: not OK | John Howson

Industrial revolutions alter a country’s geography | John Howson

Birds of a feather | John Howson

As I write this on a Sunday morning, I am reminded of the phrase in Matthew’s gospel at Chapter 26 and Verse 11: ‘The poor you will always have with you.’

That statement is not an admission of defeat, but a call to arms’. Abolishing the Social Mobility Commission must not weaken our mission for a more equal society. Now, I wonder where that advocation will feature any policy resulting from the spending of the £76 million pounds received by a political party this week?

Music Teachers: demand and supply

As part of its  monthly review of applications by graduates to train as a teacher, this blog has often commented upon the issue of whether there will be sufficient new teachers of music. This blog has also condemned the withdrawal of the bursary for music by the Labour government.

Recent posts include:

Don’t let this government kill off music in state schools. | John Howson July 2026

Music ITT: has the government made a mistake? | John Howson June 2026

Reviving Music Teacher Bursaries: A Necessity | John Howson

These posts are all related to the supply side of the question about how many music teachers are needed each year to staff the state school system in England. The DfE answers that question using the Teacher Supply Model, basically an algorithm using past data that can be problematic when future needs don’t follow past trends.

For most of the period between 2015 and July 2026, I have been tracking actual demand for music teachers in state schools, as recorded through advertisements. Tracking adverts has the added advantage of not only assessing demand for classroom teachers, but also looks at trends for subject leaders in music, and the extent to which they are part of larger groupings of arts and creative subjects. Tracking vacancies can also highlight areas where demand is not being met easily, but highlighting where vacancies are being re-advertised.

I have already posted a couple of blogs so far this year on demand:

Labour market for music teachers: update to end of April 2026 | John Howson

Demand for music teachers: where were the jobs in early 2026? | John Howson

During the summer, I have been working on a report considering a number of factors around the vacancies for music teachers. The report:

The Demand for teachers of music: January to August 2026

Is now available from dataforeducation@gmail.com

Part of the conclusion to the report states that;

‘It will not be known until December 2026 as to whether trainee numbers are sufficient to meet the needs of schools after taking into account the number of returners to teaching. However, the fact that some 20% of posts were readvertised during the survey period does point to some pressure on the pool of possible applicants. There certainly seems to be only a small reserve at best. ‘

Music is an important art of the nation’s cultural heritage and identity, and the State, through schooling, has an important part to play in recognising the breadth and depth of that heritage, and encouraging future generations to continue and develop it in ways never imagined when I was at school.

To ensure a pipeline for the future, especially if university departments continue to axe music degrees, then the music community in schools should consider creating a teaching apprenticeship for those young people that are good at music and might want to become a teacher. Creative thinking about developing future teachers of music is an imperative. Now, who will take the lead? The new National Centre? Unlikely? So, it is up to the community, and perhaps MusicMark to think deeply about the issue of where the next generation of teachers of music will come from in a changing world of higher education. A teaching conservatoire?

Wearable glasses: a need for a new school rule?

This post on LinkedIn caught my eye recently. It adds yet another challenge to schools trying to keep pupils and staff safe in an ever-changing world, where technology is continually throwing up new challenges.

A small request as the new academic year begins. As Meta glasses and other wearable technologies become more common, ‘covert’ recording in classrooms is going to become increasingly easy. I get that it happens, maybe it shouldn’t but it does.

Personally, I really don’t mind being recorded; if a student genuinely thinks having a recording of part of a session will help them revisit an explanation or support their learning, I’m pretty relaxed about it. ,Indeed, if the reason was genuine, I’d probably be quite happy that there’s another way for you to digest the information I’m trying to deliver.

But please ask first.

Ater reading this post, and considering the debate around mobile phones in schools, I wonder if I can see a new school rule being developed, perhaps along the following lines:

Any pupils, staff and visitors wanting to wear glasses on school premises must register a photograph of those glasses with the school office, and notify the school office of any change.

Pupils and visitors should be aware that cameras at entry points and classroom doors check anyone entering the school wearing glasses to ensure that they are of the registered design.

The rule is to protect everyone (pupils and staff) from the use of unregistered recordings within the school premises. It is just an extension of the current photo pass rules, but adapted to cope with new technology.

If we are going to be wiped out as a species by AI, sometime before my 90th birthday, then is this issue worth worrying about. I don’t know, but I do know keeping vulnerable young people safe is an essential role for the State, and its agents, as well as private sector organisations that offer services to young people and vulnerable adults.

I would be interested to hear what others think? Over-reaction, as I think knife arches are in schools, or a sensible approach to a possible problem? What degree of risk are we willing to accept? I don’t want knife arches in schools | John Howson

It was the mass killing of pupils 30 years ago in Dunblane  that started the drive to ensure the safety of those in schools. So far, compared with what is happening around the world, especially in countries where guns are commonplace, England has avoided large scale attacks, but, as I know from personal experience, one attack is one too many.