Free schools falling at the first hurdle

From the Guardian some more details emerge of how the 'free' schools are to be set up. So a shake-up of planning regulations - good. It would be a bit pointless to try this if the result was that you could only set one up in a school-type building.

However we then are told how to set one up. 500 words on what capacity they have to deliver their "educational vision" and 2,000 words to set out their methods, curriculum policy and the evidence regarding a demand for places.This part is not so good.

Okay I accept that the priority is the education of the children therefore we want to weed out the fly-by-night operators, but come on "educational vision" what sort of crap is that "We want to provide children with knowledge" there you go an education vision and I didn't even need all 500 words. The next part fleshes things out in terms of how you're going to provide said vision and that's fine; except the last bit. Evidence for the demand for places, um no. No, no and thrice no. What this means is that a school can only be created if the existing schools can't cope and/or people want to leave those schools because they're rubbish.

This is old style thinking. If the funding is set-up correctly the good schools will flourish, the bad-schools will fall. Having an extra school isn't going to distort things in the way that a large supermarket landing on a town will. It's not going to be a case of people running to the new big school because they're cheaper and more convenient, unless every other school in the area is miles away and requires a premium to attend in which case they need this school.

Remove the company jargon-speak and ditch the requirement for evidence of 'need'.