For the past few months, Ed Balls has been up to no good. He released one of those famous ‘white papers’ the other week, recommending that teachers are issued with a licence which are re-issued every five years if the teacher is still capable of doing their job. This amounts to shooting the easy target.

The government is aware of the grim prevalencof antisocial behaviour in society. They realise they have failed to deal with it. Meanwhile, MPs have been demonstrating that they are not fit to do their job, by stealing from the taxpayer in the form of expenses which are ‘in the rules’. (Certain things aren’t in the rulebook because it should be obvious that you can’t do them, hence the lack of a rule in football which prohibits the wearing of kitchen knifes as studs to keep opponents away). There are plenty of examples in society of unfair and selfish conduct, and the government has not managed to reduce these instances. They needed someone to blame. They picked teachers.

Anything except admitting that a horrifyingly large proportion of parents are unfit to raise a child. Although I say it in a not-wholely-literally way, some people just shouldn’t be allowed to raise a child. Their licence should be revoked. Teachers can work wonders between 9am and 4pm, and have them all undone by the next morning with the influence of lousy parents. There are wonderful schools, with wonderful teachers, in which there still exist dreadful pupils. Has the school let them down? Probably not. Although the school and its teachers have a duty to persist with improving the prosperity of the pupils until it is assured, there is only so much that can be done outside of the home environment. Sometimes the power of the schooling can help a child to overcome an adverse upbringing. Sometimes, if a school is not collectively performing well for its pupils, good parenting can weather the storm.

By and large, parents let their children eat the wrong food, stay up too late watching unsuitable programmes, do relatively little exercise, and read far less than they should. All of these things hinder a teacher in doing what they desire most – helping children to prosper. This is what the government should focus on – how to be a parent, not how to be a teacher. I would say that a hugely overwhelming majority of teachers are good at their job. Few are so beyond redemption that they should be prohibited from teaching, whereas many parents should never have had children in the first place. A lot of them didn’t even mean to. The key to improving the lives of our future generations is by acknowledging that parents are more instrumental than teachers in how a child turns out.

So, Ed Balls, I ask you what on earth you are hoping to achieve. To put non-sadists off teaching? To blame other people for the government’s shortfalls? To prove you’ve actually been doing some work? What is the meaning of this, and how will it help schools? I’ll tell you – it won’t. It’s just bureaucratic froth in a disappointing governmental cappucino.

Not that I mean to suggest that Michael Gove will be a better man to run the country’s education system. Firstly, he loves daft policies as much as Ed Balls. Secondly, he sets a terrible example of professionalism to adults and children alike. It is not, despite what he may think, acceptable to claim £14o for ornate lamps at the taxpayer’s expense, nor indeed a £20 mug. I also don’t believe it is right to maintain a £5000-a-month role as a journalist whilst he is supposed to be serving the needs of his constituents, and working out the way forward for education in England. There’s just not enough time in the day to fulfill all of these roles adequately. If anything, Gove will be worse, and those working in education should brace themselves. What Mr. Cameron sees in Mr. Gove is most unclear. Gove should be cast aside in the first instance – he is not fit to meddle with something as important as education.

We need to re-examine the way in which education is overseen by the government. The current system is under-performing.