Category Archives: employment

Windfall profits and SEND

Posted on by
Reply

There is no doubt that the rise in demand for special school places over the past few years was neither anticipated nor effectively dealt with by the State. One consequence is that large amount of off-balance sheet debt being carried by many local authorities responsible for schooling in England. Another consequence, highlighted by the Liberal Democrats in a press release issued today, is what might be described as the ‘windfall’ profits being made by a few in the SEND sector. Lib Dems demand cap on SEND providers profits as top firms rake in £100m – Liberal Democrats

When the highest paid director of a company operating both care homes for children and special schools is paid over £300,000, or more than twice the salary of a Director of Children’s Services commissioning the use of places in the schools and homes, it seems sensible to question whether such use of public money should continue.

At this point, I must make clear that I am a capitalist. The 40 years I have traded on my own account and through a company, as well as held a portfolio of investments in other companies. However, there are two issues that concern me. Where should the boundary line between services offered by the State and those run by the private sector be drawn? And how should price be determined?

It is interesting, as I have noted before, that in the USA and many other countries, public transportation is just that: a service run by the State. In England it has become a battleground between the State and private enterprise and the differing political opinions. Most would expect SEND to be a public service.

What often seems to be lacking is a mechanism to regulate the costs of suppliers to the State. When the private sector funds its enterprise by borrowing to provide the services and then expects the State to service that debt with a profit element added, it seems to me like time to take the service out of the private sector, and back into public provision.

In the case of SEND school places, national and local government should work together to prove places in state-run schools that would obviate the need for private sector intervention. This means the State, in this case the DfE, being much more interventionalist than has been the case.

The Liberal Democrats, of which I am a member and activist, noted in their press release that

‘Research commissioned by the party and carried out by the House of Commons Library showed that the top handful of profiting companies each took home tens of millions a year. One Group, operators of 28 special schools, turned over just over £200 million a year, making £44 million in profit – a margin of over 20%. That profit is 150% what the company made in 2022.’

How many more teachers might the £44 million have funded? While we wait for the government to produce a White Paper on SEND, perhaps the Local Government Association should set up a taskforce to remove the need to use the private sector.

I am sure that when John Stuart Mill, the nineteenth century philosopher, said that’ it was the duty of the State to see it citizens were educated, not to educate them itself’ he did not expect the cost to the State to be more than a reasonable amount.

NEETS: Why is London so different to the rest of England?

Posted on by
Reply

London seems to be a different world to much of the rest of England when it comes to looking at a range of different indicators about education. The latest one where the statistics raise an interesting question is the percentage of 16- and 17-year-olds that are NEETs (Not in Education, Employment or Training).

With the raising of the suggested ‘learning leaving age’ to eighteen (the official age is still sixteen) it is expected that almost all students in what is Years 12 and 13 should be in some form of certified education or training. The DfE asks local authorities for data each year bout the percentage participating in education or training and produces scorecards on-line. I wonder how many local authority scrutiny committees ever see this data? Participation in education, training and NEET age 16 to 17 by local authority, Academic year 2024/25 – Explore education statistics – GOV.UK

The scorecard for Oxfordshire can be found at Oxfordshire_neet_comparator_scorecard.pdf

Looking through the data for all local authorities for both 2019 and 2025 what struck we was there was a definite London effect. 28 London boroughs had higher participation rates in 2025 than in 2019. For the rest of England there were only 37 other local authorities with higher participation rates in 2025 than in 2019.

One explanation is the inclusion of ‘no data’ in the NEETs percentage. As the DfE noted;

 ‘NEET/not known rates at the end of 2024/start of 2025 ranged from 0.0% City of London to 21.5% in Dudley. Dudley’s rate includes 2.4% NEET and 19.1% activity not known.’

So, either London boroughs are better at collecting the data – quite possible, given their relatively small size and close geographical cohesion, or there is something else going on.

On the other hand, only seven ‘shire counties’ had higher participation rates in 2025 than in 2019.  Might the decimation of rural bus services and the effect of a punitive motor tax on those without a no claims bonus be something to do with this change? Could it be that in large counties there are no longer the staff to badger multi-academy trusts (MATs) to provide accurate data about the destination of Year 11 leavers?

I think the DfE data should make clear both the known percentage of NEETs and the percentage of the age group where these is no data available. Perhaps, there might be a scorecard of MATs to identify those that provide high quality data, and those where hard pressed local authorities have to waste time and money chasing the data.

With the job market looking increasingly challenging over the next few years, and fewer incentives for employers to offer jobs with training to school leavers, the percentage of NEETs is an issue that needs more visibility, especially with the rapid growth in EHCPs. Will the significant increase in young people with mental health issues result in more NEETs, and if so, will London be different?

It’s a funny old world

Posted on by
Reply

On the day when nurses look as if they will join resident doctors in demanding more pay, figures about applications from graduates to train as a secondary school teacher hit decade high levels, even after removing the degree apprenticeship numbers from the totals. This month, according to DfE data, 58,880 candidates have submitted one or more applications to train as a teacher. This compares with 46,696 list July and 45,000 in 2108, before the pandemic. Initial teacher training application statistics for courses starting in the 2025 to 2026 academic year – Apply for teacher training – GOV.UK

This July, there were 36,283 candidates applying to train as a secondary school teacher, compared with 17,997 wanting to train as a primary school teacher.

By comparison in July 2018, 26,060 women had applied, whereas in July 2025 that had increased to 31,439. However, applications from men had increased from 12,680 in 2018 to 18,904 this July

Traditional higher education and SCITT courses still account for the bulk of the routes into teaching selected by candidates. However, candidate numbers on traditional salaried routes were down this July, from 8,927 to 7,636, but that may be partly the 7,332 candidates that have applied for the Postgraduate teaching apprenticeship route, up from 6,433 last July.

The new Teacher Degree Apprenticeship route that has attracted 1,079 candidates so far this year. This is a new route and, presumably isn’t open to graduates.

Although applicant numbers from the ‘rest of the world’ group are down this July, from 9,586 in July 2024, to 8,563 this July – this number still represents nearly 20% of all candidates.

Some subjects, including art, physical education, physics, mathematics and computing have recorded their highest level of ‘offers’ this year since the 2013/14 recruitment round. How many are multiple offers or from candidate’s not able to fulfil visa requirements won’t be known until the courses start in just over a month’s time.  Interestingly, offers for English courses are below the number of offers made in July 2024.

Despite the significant increase in candidate numbers, some subjects will not hit their targets set by the DfE this year. Subjects most likely to miss their targets are business studies, drama, religious education, music and design and technology. In English, it looks touch and go at this moment in time as to whether or not the target will be hit.

In some subjects, such as physical education, where the target is 725, there is a risk of a significant overshoot in offers. Such a situation might leave large numbers of trainees with additional debt and little chance of a teaching post in England next summer. The DfE will need to be alert to this issue, especially if the growth in ‘AI’ changes the labour market for those with degrees in physics and mathematics, so as to make teaching look like an interesting career at current salary levels.

It would be a funny old world if incentives to train as a teacher had to be switched from mathematics and the sciences to English and the arts.

The crisis in physics teaching

Posted on by
Reply

NfER has published some interesting research about the distribution of physics teachers A widespread lack of specialist physics teachers persists due to recruitment and retention challenges – NFER The most alarming statistic in the report is that 26% of state-funded secondary schools that responded to the School workforce Census had no qualified physics specialist in their science department.

However, there is a caveat to making too much of the data. This is because it is taken from the School Workforce Census. As this is a self-reporting census, the data must be regarded with a degree of caution, as there could be some under-reporting.

As the School Workforce Survey is conducted by the DfE each autumn term, it should have a degree of reliability. However, the NfER report only contains data from 2,296 of the 3,456 state-funded secondary schools in England.

Even so, assuming all the remaining schools have at least one qualified teacher of physics that would mean at least 12% of schools were without a qualified teacher of physics, and more than a third of schools (36%) has either no teacher or only one teacher.

Now some of these schools are 11-16 schools, and a few the remaining middle schools classified as secondary schools. These schools don’t need a teacher for ‘A’ level courses. But who is teaching the GSCE physics courses, and how many pupils from these schools go on to study physics at ‘A’ level?

For the 11-8 schools with no qualified teacher of physics, what arrangements are being made for pupils that want to study the subject at ‘A’ level. If it is matter of having to change school, then what are the costs to the pupils and their families. This is another example of where transport costs may affect choice of courses post-GCSE.

Do schools support each other? This was easy when all schools were maintained schools. In the 1960s, the local girls’ school where I lived could not support Chemistry ‘A’ level, and those girls wanting to study the subject joined the ‘A’ level class at the school I attended. This must be more challenging to arrange these days with competing Multi Academy Trusts.

Interestingly, if you add up all the qualified teachers in the table in the NfER survey it amounts to more than 3,500 qualified teachers of physics: enough for one for every school. However, our distribution system for teachers is based upon open market principles, with teachers free to apply for any post, and teach where they like. Is this the best system for the education of all children, if it means that some are deprived the opportunity to study subjects such as physics because there is no qualified teacher?

Hopefully, the present position marks the bottom of the staffing cycle, and improved interest in teaching, as reported in this blog and on my LinkedIn pages, means more trainees with emerge into the labour market over the next few years.  The issue then will be how to create teaching posts for them. Wil schools be required to either redeploy an existing member of staff or make them redundant? Those schools with falling rolls and a stable staff might find the former difficult. What is needed is a national plan for physics, and perhaps other subjects where there are teacher shortages. But, sadly, I doubt we will see such a radical idea from this government.

Schooling and the relentless march of technology

Posted on by
Reply

Teachers will not have been happy to read of employers paying workers the same money for a four day week where they used to earn for working for five days. I assume that productivity or output or company profits remained the same, so the company could afford to be this generous while not upsetting its shareholders.

Unhappy teachers might reflect on two things. As technology improves, so workers can produce the same output in less time: think handwriting letters, then dictating them to someone that then typed them and then word processing them. Of course, rewarding those workers that benefit could come at a cost to productivity and growth for all. Why not continue the five day week and produce more?  

My parent’s generation worked a five and a half day week, with Saturday working being commonplace. Teachers have not benefitted from these changes, partly because their job has largely been unaffected by significant changes in technology that improve productivity. Now this may be because teaching is a public sector good and there is no profit element to spur on change for the benefit of both owners and workers.

As we can see from the imposition of VAT on private schools, the reaction of many was to increase fees, not to improve productivity, even by adding one pupil per class to their already small classes – special schools excepted – and absorb the cost.

However, it is the second implication of technological change and its effect on teachers and society that worries me just as much. Here’s another example. Driverless vehicles will become mainstream. Sure, there will be accidents, as there were when railways and aeroplanes were being developed. And these days society knows more about preventing those sorts of accidents happening to the same degree – think of the space race and the ratio of deaths to achievements. But, what of the many drivers that will join the ranks of porters, stenographers, bank tellers, coal miners and many others whose jobs have disappeared. Will technology create another set of new jobs for those with skills to do the jobs of today?

What are the implications for schools and their role in society? This should be the key question at the Festival of Education? What steps are politicians and the think tanks that provide them with research doing to consider the role of schooling in the second half of this century. After all, those that start school at age five this coming September will likely not retire on a state pension until 2090 or possibly even later.

Primary schooling with the acquisition of vocabulary and the social skills of living together in communities will become even more important than it has been seen by politicians in the past. Secondary education and subject skills might even become less important.  The recently announced government inquiry into White working-class kids might want to think about this issue during their deliberations. Solutions for the problems of the past won’t help the kids facing an uncertain future.

Falling rolls

Posted on by
Reply

The projections for pupil numbers up to 2030 were issued by the DfE this week.

At the same time the Office for National Statistics (ONS) looked at the likely size of + the school population  aged 5-15 National population projections – Office for National Statistics both have implications for the demand for teachers in England. This data can help determine how many teachers will be needed to staff schools and the attractiveness of teaching as a career.

The DfE concluded the following for the remainder of this decade;

State-funded nursery & primary schools

  • The overall pupil population in these school types is projected to be 4,205,000 in 2030. This is 300,000 (6.7%) lower than the actual population in 2025 (4,505,000).
  • The revised projection for 2028 of 4,319,000 pupils represents a 5.4% fall from 2024; this is 38,000 lower than the previous forecast, as last year’s projection showed a 4.5% fall over the same period.
  • The nursery & primary population is therefore still projected to drop and is doing so at a faster rate than previously projected.

State-funded secondary schools

  • The secondary school population is projected to be 3,135,000 in 2030. This is 97,000 lower than the actual school population reported in the 2025 school census of 3,232,000.
  • The revised projection for 2028 of 3,208,000 secondary pupils represents a 0.8% fall from 2024, and is 55,000 (1.7%) lower than last year’s projections which reverses the previously projected 0.9% increase over the same period. 
  • The pattern of change in the secondary school population seems to indicate that it plateaued between 2024 and 2025, will remain at a similar level until 2026, and is then projected to start declining slowly. This suggested plateau is earlier than the peak in 2026 projected last year but will be subject to change if pupil numbers bounce back, fluctuate, or continue to plateau in future years.
  • The actual number of secondary school pupils in 2025 fell slightly as more pupils moved out of the secondary phase than moved in. Changing historical birth rates and trends in net migration are likely driving factors. National pupil projections, Reporting year 2025 – Explore education statistics – GOV.UK 

According to the ONS projections, there are expected to be fewer children in the UK by the middle of both 2032 and 2047, compared with the middle of 2022. The ONS have based this on a view that the assumed fertility rates in the 2020s and 2030s will be even lower than those around 2001, when UK fertility reached a record low.

By mid-2032, the number of children (those aged from 0 to 15 years) is projected by the ONS to have decreased by 797,000 (a fall of 6.4%), from 12.4 million to 11.6 million. By mid-2047, the number of children is projected to remain around the mid-2032 levels. Of course, if the birth rate changes, these numbers could be either too high or an underestimate. Either way planners are no expecting the need for more teachers due to changes in the birth rate.

However, these numbers are just assumptions, and don’t take into account other changes in the numbers in the 0-15 age groups resulting from any net balance once both emigration and immigration have been taken into account.

Other factors, such as the departure rate from teaching, due either to the popularity of teaching or the availability of alternative employment opportunities, as well as the age-profile of the profession and the number of teachers retiring can affect the demand for teachers. Policy changes concerning how children are taught can also affect the demand for teachers. How will AI and attitudes to issues such as home schooling are two imponderables that might affect the demand for teachers.

These days, as well as the traditional modelling, the DfE has access to up to the minute data on vacancy rates for teachers, and how posts are filled. This new data, allied to more traditional methods of estimating the demand for teachers, should help to ensure teacher unemployment can be kept to a minimum. After all, there is little point in spending money training teachers only for them to be both burdened with debt and unable to find a teaching post.

Is AI bigger than the internet revolution?

Posted on by
Reply

During my lifetime, I have experienced three major revolutions driven by technology; the microprocessor revolution of the 1970s and 1980s; the internet and social communication revolution of the 1990s and 2000s around the internet and phones and gaming, and now the Artificial Intelligence revolution: or AI as it almost universally known.

Over the past week, I have set three different AI sites three different tasks, all using free versions of the software. The tasks were: draft a script for a play; create a website of this blog and turn a poem into a song and add new verses.

I was amazed at the results for all three tasks, and especially how quickly they were performed so early into the AI revolution.

I asked for a script for a play about a closure of a college, and ‘The last assembly’ gave me 5 key characters, four themes for the play and even some possible dialogue for a final speech and how the other characters reacted to its delivery.

In its way, even more impressive was the website created to market this blog. In under 5 minutes, and after a bit of interplay with the AI agent there was a useable website that those, I have sent it to thought was an attractive website. Sure, there were a few wrinkles to iron out, such as the wrong date being assigned to some posts used as examples, and the first version being just in monochrome. But, 5 minutes, and free, and perfection is expected!

The third task took a poem I had written to celebrate a music festival’s 40th anniversary and created a song for primary school-children based upon a first two verses from the poem that I had created.

Here was the poem’s first three verses.

Sing for the sound of singing

Sing for the joy of singing

Sing for the harmony of singing:

So, sing we all together.

As we sing together here,

Different schools, but single purpose,

Combining in this special place

For forty summers since.

Forty years of many pupils,

staff and parents, come all to

Celebrate in song and sounds

Old, new, would be traditional.

And my attempt at a song, something I have never tried to do before.

[C] Sing, sing, sing

[F] Sing for the joy of singing

[C] Sing, sing, sing,

[G] Sing for the sound of singing

  • So we
  • sing to·[C] gether.

[Am] Let us sing as one

[F] Different schools,

[C] but single purpose,

  • Let us
  • sing to·[C] gether.

Here’s what AI added

[C] Raise, raise, raise

[F] Raise up your voice in chorus

[C] Loud, proud, strong,

[G] Let every heart sing with us

  • So we
  • sing to·[C] gether.

[Am] Every voice belongs

[F] Every note a story

[C] Blending dreams

[G] in shared harmony

  • Let us
  • sing to·[C] gether.

[C] Hope, hope, hope

[F] Hope in the songs we’re sharing

[C] Shine, shine, shine,

[G] Shine with the love we’re bearing

  • As we
  • sing to·[C] gether.

I was also offered platforms where the backing track could be created. Now, the poem was written in an hour after receiving the invite, and isn’t great literature, so the song isn’t a work of art, but AI was asked for something primary school children might sing, and I think that’s what was created.

If I can do these three things with no tutorial support in less than half an hour all told, then we have to take AI, and its implications for our school system seriously now.

These three tasks were relatively value-free, but AI has the power to drive thinking, values and morals.

With the government extending the franchise to those aged 16 or above, what we teach in school is now of vital importance, and it must no longer be just a diet of facts or an attempt to create a purpose for handwriting other than as an art form. Politicians of all parties need to think seriously and quickly about what we need to teach in schools.

This blog was created by a human except for the verses of the song that were created by AI

1,500 posts and counting

Posted on by
1

When I wrote my first post on this blog, on the 25th of January 2013, I little though that I would reach 1,500 posts. However, despite stopping posting for 18 months, between the autumn of 2023 and May this year, while I was otherwise occupied as a cabinet member on Oxfordshire County Council the blog has now reached the milestone of 1,500 posts, including 40 so far this year since I started the blog up again this May.

Since one of the features of the blog has been commenting on numbers, here is a bit of self-indulgence. The blog has had 175,983 views since its inception, from 93,875 visitors, and has attracted 1,459 comments. The average length of a post has been between 550-670 words, although there have been a few longer posts in response to consultations and Select Committee inquiries.

How much holiday do teacher have? is the post with the most views – more than 6,500 and rising. Some posts have had no views, but are still an important record of my thoughts. The United Kingdom has been responsible for the most visitors: not a surprise, as most posts are about education in England. However, the USA comes second, with more than 15,000 views. Apart from some former French speaking countries in West Africa, Greenland and Paraguay, almost all other countries have had someone that has viewed the blog at least once.

Later this year, I will be publishing a book of the 2013 posts from the blog, and at that point they will disappear from public view. If you want to register for the book, check on Amazon after August 2025 or email dataforeducation@gmail.com for publication information. Alternatively, ask your favourite bookshop or library to order a copy.

I am sometimes asked about my favourite post. With 1,500 to choose from, that’s difficult, as many haven’t seen the light of day for a decade or so. However, Am I a blob? From 2013, was fun to write, and the posts about Jacob’s Law finally brought about a change in the legislation over admissions in the current bill going through parliament.

Most posts have been written, as this one is, in one session from start to finish, with editing just to tidy up my thoughts. Some are more passionate than others, and many are about teacher supply issues, where I am also researching a book on the subject covering the past 60 years of ‘feast and famine’. Much of the recent history has been well chronicled in this blog.

Thanks for reading, and for the comments. Who would have thought that someone that failed ‘O’ level English six times would end up writing a blog!  Funny old world.

Where should Teach First recruit its trainees?

Posted on by
Reply

There have been some interesting discussions recently on the LinkedIn platform about Teach First, and its possible extension beyond its original scope of recruiting from the Russell Group of universities after SchoolsWeek revealed this condition might be altered when the contract is re-tendered for the scheme. Teach First: Labour plans recruitment scheme revamp

Two points are worth making about the discussion. Firstly, the universities within the Russell Group have not remined the same since Teach First was established more than twenty years ago. Secondly, when faced with challenges in filling its target for recruiting teachers, Teach First does seem to have already extended its reach beyond the Russell group. In it 2024 annual report to the Charity Commission it said that:

‘Increasing the proportion of trainees from Russell Group universities compared to the previous year and sustaining the proportion of trainees with a first-class degree despite a decline in the number of firsts awarded.’ (Page 10, 2024 accounts with Charity Commission)

However, it didn’t provide any details of the number of non-Russell Group trainees recruited, and in which subjects. This is an important issue because of the schools where Teach First place their trainees. Historically, schools within the M25 with high percentages of disadvantaged pupils were the main focus of the programme, although in recent years it has spread more widely across the country while keeping its core mission.  

An analysis of, for instance, the percentage of new physics teachers recruited through Teach First and the schools they were placed in, and subsequently went on to work in, would be interesting, especially if compared with the distribution of new teachers of physics across all schools with similar levels of deprivation in the parts of the country not covered by Teach First.

Another interesting issue with regard to Teach First is the cost of recruiting their teachers. I saw a comment that surprised me about ‘needing to interview applicants because of AI generated applications’. I thought that all qualified applicants would have been interviewed as a matter of course.

This caused me to look at the cost of recruitment to the Teach First programme. Their accounts with the Charity Commission suggest that in 2023 the charity spent just over £7 million on recruitment and then £6,587,000 in 2024. Now, in 2023, it recruited 1,417 trainees, including to the pilot SCITT programme. In 2024, with the development of the SCITT programme, some 1,419 trainees were recruited. If the financial data is correct, then that would mean more than £4,000 to recruit a trainee in 2023, falling to £3,800 in 2024.  I wonder whether other ITT courses spend anything like this amount on recruitment?

Of course, some of the expenditure is offset by donations to the charity, and during a period when recruiting new entrants to teaching is a challenge, recruitment costs would be expected to be high. Although when recruitment to teaching is buoyant, as it may well be over the next few years, the overall cost may be higher because there are more applicants to process, especially if Teach First is opened up to a wider range of graduates seeking to become a teacher and interviews more applicants. How much should we spend on recruiting trainees teachers and how good are we at obtaining value for money on recruitment overall, including the national TV advertising campaigns?

Will the 6,500 new teachers be heading for schools in disadvantaged areas?

Posted on by
Reply

Increasing teacher numbers in disadvantaged areas and core subjects. I was very happy when I read this heading in today’s Public Account’s Committee report on ‘Increasing Teacher Numbers’. Increasing teacher numbers: Secondary and further education (HC 825)

However, when I turned to paragraphs 25-29, this section just seemed like an afterthought. How depressing was it to read that

‘Schools and further education colleges are responsible for deciding the staff they need and recruiting their own workforces. Local authorities employ teachers in maintained schools.’ Para 25

There is nothing factually incorrect in the statement, but although local authorities are the de jure employers of teachers in maintained schools, ever since the devolution of budgets in the 1990s, local authorities have had little to do with the hiring policies for teachers in these schools, and nothing to do with the academy sector.

The Committee did acknowledge that

‘Those schools with higher proportions of disadvantaged pupils tend to have higher turnover rates and less experienced teachers. This impacts the government’s mission of breaking down the barriers to opportunity and means disadvantaged children are at risk of being locked out from particular careers.’

Teachers in schools with higher proportions of disadvantaged pupils are also less experienced

‘In 2023–24, 34% of teachers in the most disadvantaged schools had up to five years’ experience (20% in the least disadvantaged schools).’

They cited the examples of computer science and physics

‘In the most disadvantaged areas, 31% of schools do not offer Computer Science A-level, compared to 11% of schools in the least disadvantaged areas, due to a lack of trained teachers. For Physics A-level, this is 9% compared to 1%.’

This will come as no surprise to regular readers of this blog. Here is the link to a post from the 21st July 2023, almost two years ago.

Free School Meals and teacher vacancies | John Howson

Thos who know my background will know that I started teaching in a school in a disadvantaged part of Tottenham in 1971, and this issue has been one that has concerned me throughout my career in education. I was, therefore, disappointed to read that

‘We asked the Department when we could expect there to be less variation between schools in the most and least disadvantaged areas, but it did not commit to a timeframe. Instead, it noted that its retention initiatives providing financial incentives were targeting schools and colleges with the highest proportion of disadvantaged students.’

This seems to me to be as close to a non-answer as one can expect. Indeed, looking in detail at the oral evidence session, this is an area where answers from the senior civil servants in my opinion suggested little hope, and not as much concern for the values implied in the questions that I would have liked to have heard. In reality, past experience tells me that it is falling rolls and fewer job opportunities that will propel teachers towards schools where they would otherwise not take a teaching post. Iti s the economy, not the DfE that will improve the life chances of children in those schools with a high proportion of disadvantaged children. This is at the same time as the lives of their parents may be worsened by unemployment and welfare cuts. It’s a funny old world.