When the Conservatives left office, spending on state-maintained primary and secondary schools totalled £13.9bn. By 2007-08, it had increased by 56 per cent in real terms, to £28.9bn. Including government-funded academies and city technology colleges, the increase is even greater. Pupil numbers fell over the same period, with the result that funding per pupil has grown by 65 per cent in real terms.
The government has been similarly generous with capital. It allowed the Building Schools for the Future programme, launched in February 2004, £9.3bn over three years from 2008-09 to 2010-11 with the aim of rebuilding or remodelling all of England's 3,500 state secondary schools.
But has all this money been well spent? Undoubtedly some has. Educational attainment has risen. Subject to reservations about standards we have to recognise that 67 per cent of 16-year-olds achieved the equivalent of five or more A* to C grades in GCSE examinations in 2009; that comfortably exceeded the government's 60 per cent target.
So the issue is not whether schools have improved during the Blair and Brown years. It is whether the improvement has been commensurate with the extra funding. If improvement could have been achieved with less, it must be possible to cut funding without damaging prospects. Attainment levels might even improve.
| Newsletter signup | Send us your ideas