DEMOS

Perhaps James Tooley, who thinks that education was fine before the state got involved with it. Or should we go for those who argue against what they see as 'the commodification of education' through the involvement of the private sector. Maybe Chris Woodhead - who thinks that 'the traditional concept of education' has to be defended against 'pernicious' arguments for a skills based curriculum - could sit alongside Guy Claxton, who has argued for an approach to education which 'builds the learning power' of young people and equips them with the wider set of capacities to succeed in life.

It's a difficult job, selcting this committee. And the reason, whether we like it or not, is that taking politicians out of decision making doesn't remove the politics from those decisions. There may be a very good case that the education system needs more stability, and that reforms need to be given time to bed down before the next round of reforms and restructing. But this means that we need new and better ways of making policy which (a) don't depend on central government driving through change every couple of years, and (b) that allow policy makers need to think a little more long-term.

The author of the Telegraph article argues that education needs to learn from the Chancellor's decision to give the Bank of England independence from political control. But perhaps the real lesson lies in another decision taken by the chancellor. The National Consumer Council suggested recently that public services should have their own version of the Golden Rule: that restructuring should never happen more than once over a five year cycle. What if we implemented that? Suddenly you can start to imagine democratic accountability working towards long-term decision making, rather than against it.