1st December 1995 at 00:00
No doubt questioning the details of a "seismic shift in culture" (TES, November 17) lays one open to accusations of l`ese-majeste.

However, I find it impossible to read Professor Michael Barber's twin assertion of an acceptance by all political parties that everyone is entitled to high standards combined with a claim that the Labour party has stated "its intention to argue for success for everyone and mean it" (sic), without wondering how this uniformly high standard will be mediated through the new two-tier system of "foundation" and "community" schools being proposed by the next Labour government.

Comparisons with the present voluntary-aided category are meaningless as the latter status is purchased through a 15 per cent contribution to the upkeep of the external fabric, a mechanism which is conspicuous by its absence in the Labour party's plans.

Just why do we need two categories of comprehensive schools, and how can the Labour party and its principal advisers argue for a new separate-but-equal type of provision in our present society, which is already chronically class- riddled?

JAMES SCOTT 29 Lady Margaret Road Crawley Sussex

Log-in as an existing print or digital subscriber

Forgotten your subscriber ID?


To access this content and the full TES archive, subscribe now.

View subscriber offers


Get TES online and delivered to your door – for less than the price of a coffee

Save 33% off the cover price with this great subscription offer. Every copy delivered to your door by first-class post, plus full access to TES online and the TES app for just £1.90 per week.
Subscribers also enjoy a range of fantastic offers and benefits worth over £270:

  • Discounts off TES Institute courses
  • Access over 200,000 articles in the TES online archive
  • Free Tastecard membership worth £79.99
  • Discounts with Zipcar,, Virgin Wines and other partners
Order your low-cost subscription today