British Identity: How Schools Can Improve Multiculturalism (Katharine Birbalsingh)

26:31Now, I don't want any of I'm not saying that kids who are clever, therefore, cannot be also morally good. But they need morality must be taught. OK, you and I will say please and thank you and recognize gratitude and please and thank you are kind of, you know, a way of demonstrating that gratitude because someone taught us. Someone when we went to take the chocolate bar from our mum, mum said, now, what do we say? What do we say? It starts with a P, P, P, and you'd say, please. And she'd say, well done, here you go. And now what do you say? Thank you. Now, that was done over and over and over again.

27:10The difference between right and wrong must be taught. And when I say taught, it must be inculcated into the child. Habit formation happens over years where you immerse the child in a certain way of being. So everyone around the child, its parents as well as its teachers, must be singing from the same hymn sheet. And that consistency, because diversity is not our strength, unity is, that consistency and unity of approach in raising the child will mean that your child in the end will be morally superior because you have taught them to be morally good. So I've really understood through that answer, for which, thank you, something about your worldview, which I didn't know before.

27:53Yeah. Which is, and I'll just say this out loud because I think it might be something some of our listeners will be thinking or some of our viewers, which is when most people say one culture is superior to another, I think what they're getting at is that, for instance, Western Enlightenment values, which include the celebration of reason, which gave us some of the modern scientific advances and the Industrial Revolution, or the Roman separation between Roman secular law and Christianity is superior to how other people in other parts of the world operate. That's not what you're saying when you say that some cultures are better than others.

28:31You believe in cultures almost as these sort of microclimates, which institutions can create that advance better behavior. Well, that's true about the last bit. I do believe in our institutional culture and that there are different institutions that have different types of cultures and so on. But do you also believe, for instance, in the supremacy of the Western Enlightenment over other parts of the world that have not gone through that or not gone through a reformation in, say, the last 300 years? No. What was interesting in what you said is that you seem to equate the Enlightenment with Christianity.

29:03No, absolutely not. Right. The Enlightenment is a repudiation of Christianity to a large extent, though people like Tom Holland would say it came out of a Christian culture. Right. OK. So because you then said Christians over the Romans, I think that was that is a superior culture. I do think that it was it was a good thing to stop to not have Romans deciding they have too many children. And when the baby is born, leave them out on the rocks to die under the sun. I think it was good that Christianity came along and said, actually, there is a sanctity to life and we shouldn't treat babies in that manner.

29:36So I think they were morally superior. OK, because I just think the context in which people talk about cultural relativism now is they think, and I think this is one of the threads behind what you have said for many years about education and also saying today about multiculturalism, which is basically a lack of Western self-confidence, a feeling that the West is in some sort of intellectual or moral retreat because it's forgotten what it gave the world. And I think that's a very prevalent concern. Well, and I share that concern, but it's more on a moral level. So the Enlightenment and all the reason, everyone thinks that we can reason our way into goodness.

30:11We cannot reason our way into goodness. Why not? Because you can reason your way into anything, really. And there are great intellectual people who have done great evil in the world. That's not an argument against reason. That's an argument against the misapplication of reason. Yeah, well, and that's what happens when all you do is throw, all your lot in with reason, I'm not saying reason is bad. Obviously, I'm a headman. You're using quite a lot of reason in this room, if I may say. One of the things that Steven Pinker would say, if he was sat here now, is the moment you argue against reason, you're arguing against yourself.

30:41Because everything you've said so far, now, wonderful conversation, which I'm so enjoying, Catherine Beard, is based on your use of reason. Yes. No, I'm not saying it's bad. I'm saying you need something in addition to that. And we have thrown our sense of morality a little bit out the window because we're uncomfortable with the position that there is a superior morality to other moralities. It is better to have a sense of the sanctity of life than to think that life doesn't matter. But it's also the idea that some things are sacred. You know, the reason why they stand for me as headmistress is not because I have a big ego.

31:17It's because it is a sacred moment. The reason why we sing God save the king is because it is sacred. The country is sacred and therefore we need to pay it respect. What is a sacred? What do you mean? What does a sacred mean? Well, I mean, look, it's true that I'm speaking as an agnostic and that the idea really does come from an understanding of... All the more reason why I want to know what you think about it. Yeah, you got me on that one. The thing is, I'm an agnostic, so then you say, well, where does it come from? And I suppose it is, you know, we understand what is sacred from what we have understood historically from God and from our Judeo-Christian historical inheritance.

32:01And I live by that inheritance. I was brought up in a Christian family. And so it's just part of it's in my bones, you know, that sort of understanding. And the values that we have at Michaela are very much a Judeo-Christian inheritance. And that's where they come from. And I call them small C conservative. You can call them traditional. I think a whole load of us certainly had all of those values. I think the further and further we get from Christianity, the more we're losing touch with values and habits and mindsets that were just normal before.

32:38I really hope you're enjoying this chat with Catherine Birbel Singh. If you are, if indeed you've enjoyed previous episodes of Radical, please do us a tiny favour and subscribe to this podcast on BBC Sounds. That way you won't miss future episodes. And if you do subscribe, just make sure you've got your push notifications turned on and you won't miss any future episodes because you get an alert every time we publish a new one. Right. Thank you so much. And now back to Catherine Birbal Singh.

33:12Why is it that the values you espouse in education, discipline, high expectations and high standards, a sense of duty, some belief in service to a community beyond yourself, what on earth about that is conservative? I understand that it's traditional, but what I've never understood as somebody who takes a very close interest in this is why it's become a right wing or conservative thing to believe in those values. Well, it never used to be. When I say conservative, I just mean small C conservative. I would argue that big C conservatives, there's a whole load of them that aren't small C conservative at all.

33:47And certainly my parents, they are very much on the left, but they're small C conservatives. Right. So it was certainly the case that the left, there were lots of people. It's social conservatism. That's all it is. It's not it's not a political thing. It's just that these days, bizarrely, there's a number of people on the left who have rejected that small C. Why do you think that is? Well, just specifically, why do you think that not everyone? Because, by the way, there are lots of exactly as you say, there are lots of Marxists who I know, including some who taught me, who believe very strongly in your educational ethos.

34:22But I just find it a curious modern phenomenon that we use the language of sports and conservatism to talk about strict academic expectations of the poorest kids. Because it sounds, it feels to me like, in my understanding of politics, it was one of the foundational and fundamental views of people on the left of politics. Yeah. That you could use education to transform people's life circumstances. That's right. And now here you are in this studio for the last 15 years and before that at the Tory Party conference talking about your educational values as if they're kind of something on the right.

34:53And I don't understand how that happened. Well, I'm not talking about them as if there are any political spectrum. No, sure. But why do you think it happened? I don't know. I don't really know. I'm really baffled. Let's talk about those values. Can we go through some of them? And we can work out why, based on your experience, and you know a lot more about this than I do, why you think. Okay, yes. Let's take each one and then you'll see why. So personal responsibility. That's a great one. So we, our school poem really is Invictus by Henley. And, you know, I am the master of my fate. I am the captain of my soul.

35:22I immediately do this because that's what the children do when they stand up at lunch and they shout it out. And I'm the captain of my fate and soul means that you are in charge of yourself. Right. And if you didn't bring your homework in, well, that's on you. and it doesn't matter what obstacles there were in front of you. Maybe it's true that your sister ripped it up. Maybe you left it on the bus. Maybe it could be any reason. It doesn't matter. You are responsible for it and you must take that responsibility and guard it and therefore take the detention because we know that there are consequences to our actions.

35:58Now, what someone on the left these days will say is... Not all of them because there's some Marxists that disagree, but a lot of people... It's true. You're right to correct me. What some of them will say is, well what about that child who comes from a difficult background what about that child who has special needs what about that child who's suffering from a mental health issue what about that child who lives on the estate uh what about that child etc etc it's not fair and unfortunately these days um jonathan height written in that his book about um the righteous mind yes where he talks about fair and care and care the compassionate sort of sensibility yeah Yes.

36:37And that they see everything through the lenses of, are we being caring and are we being fair? And so when you hold that child to the same standards as everybody else, they say that's not fair because that child, you know, all of those videos that are out there these days where they show some kids looking over into a sports arena. and then there's one kid who's shorter and that you need to prop him up on a box to be able to see. Or they have other ones where they say, take two steps forward if you had a bike growing up. Take two steps forward if you were able to go to school every day. I don't know those videos, but I get the metaphor.

37:17All of these are, you had an easy life, right? And somebody else has had a harder life. Now, we treat all of our kids the same. If you don't bring your homework in, you get a detention. It doesn't matter if you have a more challenging background. It doesn't matter if you have to take the bus instead of mum driving you to school or whatever it is, right? The fact is we treat you all the same. A modern leftist person would say that that's not fair and they would feel uncomfortable with it, right? That's an example of why they reject the value of personal responsibility. So let's go through some of the other shibboleths of modern education, which you've taken on and which I think cast you as sort of occasionally radical and occasionally in sync with the government.

38:01One other thing, and again, a lot of this, I should say, for people interested in this and parents or young people listening, a lot of this is written, I'm ashamed to say I haven't read it, but in Nick Gibb's book, Reforming Lessons. Nick Gibb is a former schools minister. He's written a book about 20 years of education policy. And he's widely held, and lots of actually senior conservatives have said to me that the one thing the conservatives got right was the stuff that Nick Gibb writes about, which is the transformation of state education. In particular, things like the focus on phonics and numeracy, which led to Britain charging up the international league tables.

38:30Can we just go through a couple of these and you could maybe just explain to me as a teacher, because I don't know why yours and Nick Gibbs' worldview you think the evidence supports. Why is knowledge-centred rather than child-centred learning the way to go? Because the adults know more than the children. So the adults have lots of knowledge in their heads. They've learned at university. They've done teacher training. They've been teaching for years. so you want to maximize the amount of time that the teacher in front of them is telling them stuff and you want to tell them the stuff. If the desks are in rows and the children are facing the teacher, then the teacher's at the front and the teacher is leading and you need somebody leading that classroom.

39:12If it's not the teacher who's leading, then it's the naughtiest child in the class who's leading. So if you have your desks in groups instead and you set them up on a task and you've given them a little bit of information, but you're not teaching them. You're thinking of yourself as a facilitator of learning. So you give them the task and then they get on with it and the children are directing the learning and you as the teacher move amongst the desks to keep them on task. The 12-year-olds don't know anywhere near as much as you do. And so there's a reason, there are lots of reasons why we do so well in our exams, but one of the big reasons is that we prize knowledge and the knowledge is at the centre of the classroom and the teacher is leading the learning in the classrooms at Michaela.

39:54So prize knowledge is kind of one of the things to which my own life, in fact, my dad's life was dedicated. And I get it theoretically. I present a quiz which is all about prize knowledge. It's one of the many reasons I love doing that job. Roger Scruton, he wrote a book called Culture Counts. Chapter three, I think, is called Teaching Knowledge. And it opens with the sentence, it is one of the most deeply rooted superstitions of our age that the purpose of education is to benefit those who receive it. And he goes on to say something along the lines of good teachers love their pupils, but they love knowledge more.

40:26They don't so much see knowledge as a benefit to their pupils, but their pupils as a benefit to knowledge. In other words, the primary purpose of education is the transmission of knowledge through the generations. Now, I get that. Lovely prose. I can quote it. I've read that book a few times. But let me just say, because it's an amazing, you know, I love Roger Scruton. I love him. I'm not sure I would meet his standards and in a way I feel bad about that because I love him so when I say that I went into teaching and I'm still in teaching for the children that's what I was going to push back on you I was going to say if I may say what I was going to kind of push back though I get it theoretically and romantically it has an instinctive appeal something about child-centred learning is it's a sort of you might quote Jonathan Haidt but there is something and I know this is what motivates you there is something about the love of the child and the love of the child as an individual.

41:20And the belief that you could maybe be flexible to a greater extent than you are, but some other teachers aren't, to kind of accommodate the needs of individual children. No, no, okay, wait, wait, wait, wait. Okay, so we've got Roger Scruton over here saying it's about passing knowledge from generation to generation. And I have a lot of admiration for that. I don't think we're there really in terms of education. I mean, you know, I understand. He's from a different generation to me and I get it and I respect it. And in many ways, I wish I were like that. I am somebody who went into teaching for the sake of the children.

41:49The reason why I work with disadvantaged children in the inner city and I've only ever worked in the inner city in London is because I believe in social mobility and I'm very much inspired by transforming the lives of my children for the better. I believe we do that through knowledge so while Roger Scruton was prioritising knowledge for future generations and I think we should, I mean I agree with him on that I also think we need to prioritise knowledge for this generation and for the children in front of us otherwise they will not be able to make the success of their lives knowledge centric learning is better than child centric learning because because you get more knowledge and look, you immediately moved to some kind of university challenge thing that you do some kind of something or other where people have to know facts, right?

42:37Something you said about some prize. I was just responding in kind to your lovely phrasing. Hang on. I was responding in kind to your lovely phrase when you said that you prize knowledge and I say that instinctively the idea of prize knowledge means a great deal to me. So I was just agreeing with you. No, no, no, no. I'm not saying you're not agreeing with me. I was just saying so people tend to think of knowledge as just learning facts by rote. God, no. No, right. Well, you don't think like that, but I'm saying this for your audience. I wasn't meaning that you were objecting to what I'm saying.

43:07It's just I wanted to explain that knowledge is about more than just facts. It's thinking about thinking. Well, first you need the facts. So you need to learn your times tables by heart. You need to just be doing your 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, etc. over and over and over again. And once you know your times tables, then you can do something more interesting with them. And you can get into really hard and deep maths by having your timetables on your fingertips like that. It's the same thing when it comes to any subject, English, history, whatever it is. You need to know various dates in history. You need to know the timeline.

43:46You need to know that the Romans came before the Middle Ages and so on, right? Now, people laugh, but people underestimate or overestimate just how much children know. If you don't teach them this stuff, then they don't have coat pegs. I like to call them coat pegs because in your head, the more knowledge you have, you can hang other stuff on them. Right? Can I go through some of the other shibboleths of where I think you are now once again, partly because you're maybe against the grain of what Bridget Philipson would do, you're to some extent radical. On the question of coursework versus exams, is it right to say that there's been a move away from exams towards coursework over the last 15 years, broadly speaking?

44:23There was, and then Michael Gove changed that. And what's happening now? So we do, it's all exams. And what do you think is the right way to go? Now things will change under Bridget Phillipson, I imagine. Why do you think exams are a better emphasis than coursework? Because for one, lots of middle class families just write the coursework for the kids. And the kids from working class families can't compete. Two, when you have to just compete in an exam, it's just more fair for that reason. but also just the preparation that you have to do is more rigorous. And it means that you will be better prepared, I think, for life because of the preparation that you have to do for those exams.

45:05I think it's better for teachers. I think the pressure that's on teachers when it comes to coursework is enormous in terms of its delivery logistically and so on. It's just it really is a nightmare. I lived through those days. It's much more straightforward with exams. So I think it's a no brainer, really. We should have exams. Another fundamental. Why should you, no matter how successful you are, no matter your authority within the culture and community you've built, why should you have the freedom to vary the national curriculum? Because there are different things that different children want in different parts of the country.

45:36You child-centred educationalist. I thought for a moment ago you were knowledge-led, for one thing. For a second thing, isn't it completely reasonable? Isn't it completely reasonable? I think it's fair to say that you and Bridget Philipson, have you spent much time with Bridget Philipson? I had a meeting with her once. How did it go? Not very well. You're not bosom buddies. You're not texting each other. No. Christmas cards have not been relayed. Well, we'll get into that in a second. Bridget Phillipson would argue, and I think that what's happening with the bills going through Parliament, I don't know where they've got to, but what's happening under her watch, there's high profile stuff like breakfast clubs and free school meals and all that.

46:12But there's also a position which the Labour government, with its majority of, I think, about 157 has, which is that there is a national curriculum. and they've got a democratic mandate to enforce that. And you want schools to have the freedom to vary that curriculum. Why should you get it? Well, it depends on what that national curriculum holds. So if it were a very traditional... It might be what the Labour government decides it should hold. They've got a democratic mandate. And that's the thing that I'm worried about. I'm very worried about the fact that we won't be able to teach those more traditional authors, dead white men, that I would like to teach lots of.

46:49I'm very worried about the fact that the more traditional subjects will be pushed aside for more modern subjects. Not that I'm against the modern subjects and I'm not against headteachers making the right decisions for their own intakes. You know, that's the thing about why should that be prescribed from the centre? This is the whole question of academies and free schools and which you've lived through. Why shouldn't there be a national edict imposed on headteachers which says this is what our children are taught? After all, the Labour Party has got a majority. They've taken that argument about this and other subjects to the public.

47:21They've been voted in. Isn't that democracy? I don't think Bridget Philipson is the person to make that decision. Why? She's the Education Secretary. I know, but unfortunately, as we all know, politicians are not necessarily worthy of their positions. And they don't have the experience. Isn't that an argument against democracy? No, but it is an argument, for instance, I would like it if the education secretary had a lot more experience on the ground and a lot more success, when I say on the ground, in schools and had the experience of being a success on the ground and was not interested more in visiting schools which are less successful than visiting the extremely successful schools.

48:06The fact is that, unfortunately, too many of our politicians, I don't think, are well equipped to be in the positions that they are in. Not all of them. Some of them, because you don't necessarily have to have that experience. And I have seen politicians who have been brilliant in their positions and they haven't necessarily been teachers or doctors or whatever it is that, you know, the experience they would have needed. So it's complex. But I do think it's worrying when one person who just because they have a certain whim or a certain bias can then decide what every school in the country should be teaching.

48:42She is the democratically elected and appointed person in charge. No, we didn't elect her. There is a view, and it's not your view, but it's the view of many people in teaching unions who you don't necessarily see eye to eye with on all subjects. No, you know, you share their love of children and concern for social mobility. But, you know, they might say, you know, a Labour government has gone to the country with a manifesto. In that manifesto, there's a chapter on education and they said, we want to do X, Y and Z. And you might not like what Bridget Philipson says, but maybe you like what some other teachers, maybe you like what Michael Gove stood for slightly more.

49:13But it's in the nature of democracy that arguments are had. Governments come, governments go. And it's the prerogative and the right of that government to say what our children should be taught. Yes, but the difference between Gove and Philipson is that he gave the school leaders the opportunity to make the decisions that were right for their own cohorts. He'd never been a teacher. You might have gone on with him. You might have seen the world more than you. You might have enjoyed Roger Scruton's books as many as he did. But that's the point. He was humble enough to recognize that. And so he allowed those of us who know best to make the right decisions for our own cohorts.

49:45She, on the other hand, is taking away that freedom from us. And many different freedoms, not just that freedom. What are the other freedoms that you think she's taken away? Well, for instance, the freedom to be able to have the number of branded items that we might need for our uniform in order to bring about that unity. Like I said at the beginning, unity is our strength, not our diversity. And if children all look different, if the football team, England football team are all wearing different shirts, they cannot win. We believe in fullness and fairness at the BBC, as you know. And the Department for Education, a spokesperson said, the Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill will be a seminal moment for the safety and success of our children, introducing common sense measures backed by parents and teachers that ensure excellence and support from highly qualified teachers and a cutting edge curriculum to reduce costs for families through breakfast clubs and school uniforms.

50:34Do you disagree with any of that? I have nothing. I have no problem with the breakfast clubs. I have a problem with the uniform because all they are doing is looking at how much something costs. Is it your problem that you just don't like having a boss? No, I'm happy to have a boss as long as that boss knows what she's doing. And the fact is, three branded school items is not enough, especially for schools where sport is huge. How are you meant to do it? You need a tie, you need a blazer, you need trousers. And then what they'll say is, well, you don't need trousers. Here's an example, right? Somebody who doesn't know anything about schools, because they are not school leaders, will say, why do you need...

51:10What's that? Like Michael Gove. Yes, and that's why he allowed us to make the choice, right? He gave us the freedom as school leaders to be able to do what was right for our cohorts. So why do you need a branded trouser? Because children like to, the girls will wear very tight trousers, the boys will pull their trousers down. It brings in a street culture into the school, which makes the school behavior very difficult to manage. It's very important to have a branded trouser so that the teachers can recognize it's the school trouser and the trouser is made in such a way so it cannot be pulled down and it cannot be made into the sexy fashion that the girls like.

51:45Now, when you do that, you have better behavior. You have better social mobility. I know that Bridget Philipson, I'm certain of it, as much as I'm she's not I'm not her greatest fan. I believe she wants what's best for poor children. She grew up in poverty. What she's doing will harm poor children. And she doesn't understand that. And the reason she doesn't understand that is she's never led a school. It's as simple as that. So when you put somebody in charge of schools, and especially in charge of the curriculum, and then tell us all to do what she says, when she has no idea what children need, that's a problem.

52:15How did this conversation go? It didn't go well. What's the argument? What did she say to you? I mean, I'm interested in that. Well, I was trying to put forward these arguments, and she wasn't listening. Because she believed that it was... But I don't understand. And why does she disagree with you on the question of uniforms, for instance, or your ability to set a curriculum or teachers? When my deputy and I both went, when we would put forward our ideas, her response would always be some standard, like your response there. She'd come out with some standard response. I was just reading her. I wanted to be fair and I wanted to put their view.

52:47Yes, but I'm saying those were her responses. They were always just ba-ba-ba-ba-ba-ba-ba. And I'm making a nuanced point about uniform. You know, our uniform, you're looking at about 80 pounds, you know, for the uniform. It's true. We have five branded items. It's true that if you had only three branded items at a school, it would be a little bit cheaper. But it will reduce our ability to have excellent behavior and to help poor kids succeed and to enable social mobility. Now, I have to say, in our school, we will probably be OK because we are the strictest school in Britain and I am the headmistress.

53:24but I know that there are many schools across the country trying to improve their behaviour and they will do it first with uniform. One of the things you've often said which I think is very interesting to people is that actually the kids love the discipline. It takes them a while to get used to it but you're very strict. By the way, I hope you notice I try to avoid the cliche about you being Britain's strictest head teacher. I didn't say it. You raised it, not me. Sorry to point as I said that. But I just wanted to ask you the extent to which you feel that your school is actually having to sort of fix and sort out not just educational issues, but actually social issues.

54:02Yes. Family breakdown. Yes. Crime. Yes. Hunger. Yes. And the extent to which you feel sort of uncomfortable with the fact that you're going beyond the traditional small c kind of pedagogy into kind of actually solving social problems in a way that you feel that it would be better if society sorted out rather than leaving to schools. Yeah, well, and it's very difficult for schools. Teachers and headteachers are under enormous pressure with trying to sort out all kinds of issues, as you say, family issues and so on, that in 1955, we didn't have, you just didn't have so many issues. And it makes life very difficult for school leaders.

54:37But I mean, that's the job. That's what we've got to do if we want to enable social mobility for our kids. And that is very much what we're all about at Michaela, which is why, you know, I slightly part ways with Roger Scruton. Although what is important to take from what he said there is that he recognized our sense of duty towards the future generations and that we do so by passing on wisdom, by passing on knowledge of what we know, of our heritage. and that is what is so important and that if we lose that through a rewrite of the curriculum which takes away from our heritage and our historical inheritance that belongs to all of us.

55:19This idea that Shakespeare only belongs to white people, it's not true, it's not right. It belongs to all of us and Roger Scruton himself, he went around the school and he told me how it was a transformational moment for him because he'd always believed that our inner city children would never be able to access the knowledge that was necessary to feel part of the country. And that here he was in a school where he could see with his own eyes that all these brown and black children were accessing the knowledge and the values that were necessary to be part of Britain. And, you know, we come full circle with what we were talking about, which is that our job as teachers, yes, it's to do, you know, there's all the extra stuff, the family breakdowns, the crime, the issues, the social issues that really shouldn't be on a teacher's plate.

56:11But schools are more than just places where you learn algebra and grammar. You do learn that and we learn it very well at Michaela. But you also learn values and you learn social cohesion. You learn kindness and gratitude. You ought to learn those things. And unless we prioritize those small c conservative, traditional, however you want to put it, If we don't prioritise those values with our children, whatever colour, race, religion they are, then we don't have anything to bind us together. What is it to be British, right? And you can't say to people they need to integrate if there is nothing for them to integrate into.

56:49Do you feel that the story of your career is that having won a very big public argument and worked with the government who supported you, you're now having to win that argument all over again? Or survive is what I'm trying to do. We need to survive. Survive? Yeah, because I don't want to change what we do. I don't want to give up on the things that work. I don't want to. And then I will be under pressure to do so because our government that doesn't understand what poor children need will make us do so. So the radical idea to save British education and to transform the lives of millions of British kids, including those from the poorest backgrounds, and to improve social mobility is?

57:33Stick with tradition. Stick with what works. Catherine Birbel Singh, it's a real pleasure to talk to you. Thank you for having me.

57:44Catherine Birbel Singh has left the room. That is, wow. That was, I mean, for me, I hope for you as well, a hugely enjoyable and interesting conversation about a range of subjects. I think she really grabbed, especially with that last answer, the original sense of the word radical. You remember when we launched this podcast, we talked about how the word radical comes from the Latin for root and carries that sense in the etymology of returning to your roots. and she thinks the really radical thing to do now, which her enemies, I think it's fair to say, and the teaching unions don't believe, she thinks the radical thing to do in education, which would transform the lives of millions of our poorest kids, do a huge amount for social mobility, is to return to the roots of education, the traditional values.

58:32And I think she would agree with me that traditional is a better word than small C, or better phrase than small C, conservative. So that radicalism, which involves returning to the roots of education, was one thing that leapt out of me. The other is that, you know, as someone who we're talking 2025, her speech to the Tory party conference, which launched her upon the world was 2010, 15 years ago. Her career has gone, it's sort of the relationship she has had with central government and with the mood of the times has changed. You know, when she was making that argument in 2010, she was coming off the back end of a Labour government that maybe she disagreed with.

59:09And then she spent 14 years where there was a conservative government that was very sympathetic to her. And in Michael Gove as Education Secretary, in Nick Gibb as Schools Minister, she had a very sympathetic hearing from Whitehall. She now is in, as you heard, in an antagonistic relationship with Whitehall. She's in an antagonistic relationship with Bridget Philipson, who she had an antagonistic meeting with when she went along to the Department of Education with her deputy. And it just shows that though she has been consistent in her views on education, the British government, because it's changed, has not been consistent.

59:46And I think Catherine Berbilsing conveyed the sense that if you are a radical in public life over many decades, you have to win the same argument over and over again. And on this week's episode of his podcast, Political Thinking with Nick Robinson, which also plays out on Radio 4, my brilliant friend and colleague Nick is going to be talking to guess who? Yes, the Education Secretary Bridget Phillipson, who is not best mates with Catherine Baerbalsingh, not an ideological bedfellow, I think it's fair to say. and he's no doubt going to talk to her about her remarkable upbringing, enduring poverty in Washington, a town in Sunderland in the north of England and the fact that she, through education, did go to Oxford and did achieve extraordinary social mobility and perhaps he might get a chance to put some of the objections to her views on education, not least from Catherine Birblesing to Bridget Philipson.

1:00:41He's also going to talk to her about what's gone wrong in her party since Keir Starmer entered number 10, what's gone right and also what actually happens behind the scenes at Labour Conference. That drops on Friday on BBC Sounds or wherever you get your podcasts. Just search for Political Thinking with Nick Robertson and hit subscribe.

1:01:03I do just want to say, as I promised at the outset, that something really amazing is happening and I think we should mark it. And what's happening is that loads and loads and loads of you are stopping me in the street to say that you love Radical. And I would say it's been probably 22, 24 people. I was counting over the past week. And that is quite a thing. Young and old, left wing and right wing. So thank you so much to everyone. By the way, if you ever see me, and I know I'm not that famous, but if you recognize me because you watch Radical Honor iPlayer or listen to this as a podcast, please come up to me and say hello because I love your feedback.

1:01:38And frankly, it feels really nice because we're working really hard on this podcast and it feels great. So thank you to everyone who's done that. Thank you to the lady on the W7 bus outside my local Sainsbury's who said she absolutely loves this podcast. Thank you to the lovely man on the number 41 bus who we talked to eventually about cricket. But he said he just discovered our back catalogue. Thank you to the young Irish lady and her mum opposite Trinity College in Cambridge, where I was on Saturday night, who said she absolutely loved what we're doing. Particularly the Ash Sarkar episode and the one before that.

1:02:06It's lovely. There is a small, very committed team who put this podcast together. And what is so lovely is that all of you who are coming up to me and who are listening to this in big and growing numbers are really buying into our mission. And that mission is a hard one. It would be much, much, much easier for us if we just served up a single worldview. We gave you that warm, fuzzy feeling of confirmation bias as other podcasts do. It would be much, much, much easier for us if we let people get away with outlandish claims or lies or mistruths. But we actually do check stuff out. We actually do edit things.

1:02:41We actually do look for evidence and put in the course to make sure our journalism is rigorous. And that mission of trying to make sense of this crazy moment in the history of our species are really going inside the zeitgeist, helping you to understand these massive forces, these deep global trends, redefining what it is to be human. That mission is one that a large and growing number of you seem to be excited by. And that for us is both exciting and humbling. Here is just one of the messages that you've sent in this week. You can, of course, email us on radical at bbc.co.uk. You can contact us on WhatsApp.

1:03:17The number is 0330 123 9480. You can just send us a message or you can do what Edward did and send us a rather magnificent voice note. Whilst pottering around at home, sorting many chores before the winter sets in, I listened to four of Amal Rajan's radical podcast today and was fascinated. The problems discussed in homelessness, identity politics and Britain's new right all failed to mention the debt cycle that time and time again over many centuries has defined economic growth and politics. The problems in the three topics highlighted above all find their roots in today's over-leveraged society.

1:03:56This is the biggest economic difference between now and, say, 40 years ago. I would highly recommend that you find a radical economist who understands and can explain the debt cycle and what is really happening in the world and how the growth of private and then public sector leverage have driven economic growth and asset prices over the last 40 years. and also driven inequalities, just as they have in many different periods in the last 400 years. And also why all governments in the world now promise to grow their way out of current problems and why they will inevitably fail. Okay, Edward, I've got so much to say about that fantastic voice note, starting with a very, very humble thank you.

1:04:37If you listen to four episodes, my goodness, obviously I assume you listen to them all the way through and that's about four hours of your time, which is an amazing privilege to know that you've been doing that. So thank you. Right, on the debt question, I have tried, and I say this in a completely impartial way, and I've discussed this with very senior colleagues and I know this to be impartial, I have tried to elevate the situation or elevate the issue of public and private debt up the news agenda in everything I've done on this podcast and on the Today programme. I'm recording this, Edward, in the day when I interviewed Wes Streeting, one of the most senior figures in the British government, and I made the centrepiece of my interview with him, which was happening during the Labour Party conference, the issue of public debt.

1:05:16My first question to him, I think, on the economy was, is Britain spending beyond its means? So I've tried to highlight this issue many, many times on the Today programme, and I've spoken to very senior editors at the BBC to make clear my feeling that this is a huge issue. And it's not just public and private debt, as you say, Edward, it's also the fact that there are diminishing returns to labour. And over the past 10 or 15 years, lots of people across the spectrum, I know, for instance, fellow podcaster George Osborne has taken an interest in this. The share of national income in Western democracies that is going to the workforce, to labour, physical or manual or intellectual labour, is falling.

1:05:56More and more of national wealth is not going to labour, but it's going to capital. And that capital is being increasingly owned by people who own assets, particularly the new growing, exploding asset class of property. And I just think that this question of how work is no longer a route to wealth in the way that it was in the middle of the 20th century, for instance, and the fact that work is often making people having to work ever harder, basically struggling to get by and a diminishing proportion of national income is going to the workforce is one of the defining issues of our time. And what I would say to you, Edward, if you can bring yourself to do it, is please message us, radical at bbc.co.uk.

1:06:35You know the email address or you can WhatsApp us and tell us which economists you think we should get on. Because I've got lots of ideas. There are economists that we've approached. I'm very interested, like you, Edward, in this whole question around debt. And I'd love to know who you think we should get on. So come up with the ideas and I promise you we will put them into the mix. And that is it for this episode. So to make sure you don't miss future conversations, please subscribe to Radical with Amol Rajan on BBC Sounds. And you can also remember, you can watch episodes of Radical with Amol Rajan on the iPlayer.

1:07:06How cool is that? Right, speak to you next week. Goodbye.

1:07:15If journalism is the first draft of history, what happens if that draft is flawed? In 1999, four Russian apartment buildings were bombed. Hundreds killed. But even now, we still don't know for sure who did it. It's a mystery that sparked chilling theories. I'm Helena Merriman, and in a new BBC series, I'm talking to the reporters who first covered this story. What did they miss the first time? The History Bureau, Putin and the apartment bombs. Listen on bbc.com or wherever you get your podcasts.