Theresa May’s plans to open new grammar schools could put at risk years of progress towards a rigorous education for all children, the Conservative former education secretary Nicky Morgan has said.

The MP, who performed the role under David Cameron until July, said plans to increase academic selection were at best a distraction and at worst “risk actively undermining six years of progressive education reform”.

Morgan is the most senior Tory to speak out against May’s plans, although Neil Carmichael, the Conservative chair of the education select committee, has also expressed reservations.

Facebook Twitter Pinterest Nicky Morgan. Photograph: Nick Ansell/PA

In a Facebook post, Morgan said she welcomed the aims of creating a more meritocratic society and encouraging greater collaboration between universities, state schools and the private sector.

But, she added: “I believe that an increase in pupil segregation on the basis of academic selection would be at best a distraction from crucial reforms to raise standards and narrow the attainment gap, and at worse risks actively undermining six years of progressive education reform.

“The evidence is now incontrovertibly clear that a rigorous academic education does not need to be the preserve of the few. Instead, schools serving some of the most disadvantaged communities in the country – from Harris academy in Peckham to ARK Charter academy in Portsmouth to Dixon’s in Bradford – have shown that, with high expectations, good teaching and strong leadership, it is possible to build a truly comprehensive school system in which every child is able to achieve excellence.

“Instead of pursuing greater selection, I would urge the government to build on the reforms of the last government and to reaffirm the focus outlined in the Educational Excellence Everywhere white paper on tackling areas of entrenched academic underperformance.”

The Department for Education’s white paper was published under Morgan’s leadership earlier this year. The plans had no provisions for the return of grammar schools, and May has been criticised for appearing to introduce a policy not present in the Tory’s 2015 election manifesto.

The prime minister wants to end the ban on new grammar schools. Quite right too | Robert McCartney Read more

Cameron was at odds with many of his backbenchers when he first opposed overturning the ban on establishing more grammar schools. However, he maintained his position that there was no appetite to return to the old system of grammars and secondary moderns throughout his time as leader of the opposition and prime minister, when Morgan and Michael Gove were education secretaries.

Morgan’s statement suggests there could be an orchestrated move against the plan by some Tory modernisers on the backbenches when it reaches the legislative stage.



Jeremy Corbyn pledged to try to block the plans by teaming up with the Liberal Democrats in the House of Lords, in a similar way to the last government’s defeat over tax credits.

The Labour leader told Sky News: “We will oppose this in the Commons and we will be opposing this in the Lords. Obviously alliances will be formed in order to try to block this proposals. The Labour government stopped the development of new grammar schools and we will continue with that … I would like to encourage grammar schools to form themselves into comprehensives.”

He said selectivity at the age of 11 “divides communities, divides children and ends up giving a good chance to a minority and less chance to the majority”.

Corbyn dismissed May’s claim that her plans were not for a return to the binary system of old, arguing that it was fundamentally the same as the 11-plus system under which pupils either pass or fail.

Sir Michael Wilshaw, the chief inspector of schools, has said the UK could “fail as a nation” if there was a system where only the top 15-20% of pupils get a superior education.

Earlier, the prime minister was forced to defend her controversial plans to overturn the ban on grammar schools after giving a speech in central London.

She declined to say how many grammars she would ideally like to see and ducked a question about whether the government would be producing evidence from academics or Whitehall officials showing that the policy would improve educational attainment for all.

“We are not setting a quota for the number of grammar schools,” she said. “This is about what parents want locally, the institutions that come forward, groups of parents who want to set up a new free school. This is about opening the system to a greater diversity. It is also about building on the reforms we have already started which have been showing success in improving quality of education.

“I repeat, what we want to see is a diversity of provision, and for every child, they are able to get an education that is right for them.”

She highlighted potential measures to mitigate the risk that poor children – who tend to be under-represented in existing grammars – were relegated to “sink schools” as selection was expanded.

Options in a paper expected to be published on Monday will include:



Forcing new selective schools to take a minimum proportion of pupils from lower-income households

Requiring them to establish a new non-selective free school, or a primary feeder school in an area with a high density of lower-income households

Requiring them to sponsor an existing under-performing, non-selective academy school.

May also made an apparent dig at Cameron as she criticised politicians who supported a ban on grammars despite having benefited from privileged educations themselves.

May’s plans will form part of a wider package of education reforms, including an attempt to narrow the gap between universities and the schools system.

Grammar schools are not just socially divisive – they’re deeply ineffective | Sam Freedman Read more

Universities that wanted to raise tuition fees for students would be obliged to make their expertise available to younger learners, by setting up a new school or taking over a failing school, for example.

Private schools would also have to do more to help the state sector if they wanted to keep the tax breaks that come with charitable status, she said. Large private schools would have to sponsor or set up new state schools, while smaller institutions would need to provide direct teaching support or put their leaders on the boards of state schools.

“Most of the major [private] schools started out as the route by which poor boys could reach the professions. The nature of their intake may have changed today – indeed these schools have become more and more divorced from normal life,” May said.

“Between 2010 and 2015 their fees rose four times faster than average earnings growth, while the percentage of their pupils who come from overseas has gone up by 33% since 2008. But I know that their commitment to giving something back to the wider community remains.”