Since Theresa May backlash and criticism from Conservative MPs and most of the opposition parties. And, now Education Secretary Justin Greening has confirmed the plans have been scrapped after it was excluded from the Queen’s speech last week. “There was no education bill in the Queen’s Speech, and therefore the ban on opening new grammar schools will remain in place” concluded Ms Greening.          

Labour’s Shadow Education Secretary Angela Rayner condemned the £500 million plan as a “vanity project” and said there was “no evidence it will help children move on from socially deprived background.” With such high opposition it would have been difficult to pass legislation to introduce them. The original plan was put in by the Labour government in 1997 when Tony Blair was Prime Minister. 

Justine Greening confirms the ban on grammar schools will remain. The Queen’s speech stated the government will “look at all options for opening new schools and would continue to work to ensure that every child has the opportunity to attend a good school and that all schools are fairly funded." She concluded the government would publish a Green Paper on Children and Young People’s Mental Health "focused on helping our youngest and most vulnerable members of society receive the best start in life." The notes said: "This will make sure best practice is being used consistently and will help to accelerate improvements across all services so that children and young people get the right mix of prevention and specialist support." The bill also omitted the plans to scrap universal free school lunches for primary school children, meaning no new major changes will be put forward for education within the next two years. This takes away the biggest source of extra funding promised for schools in the Conservative manifesto.  

A spokesperson for the Department for Education said that the Queen's Speech was an unambiguous decision not to go ahead with creating more grammar schools.

• No new grammar schools
• Plans dropped to stop free lunches for all infants
• No legislation announced for education
• School funding plans to be put forward at a later date
• Changes to how individual school budgets are allocated will go ahead
• Technical education to be upgraded

Dr Mary Bousted, general secretary of the Association of Teachers and Lecturers (ATL) said the Queen’s Speech was a “missed opportunity” for the Government. “An investment in education now is an investment in our future, post-Brexit. There is no suggestion that the Government will properly fund the major overhaul to technical education promised in today’s Queen’s Speech.” “After seven years of brutal cuts, further education colleges have been forced to make wave after wave of redundancies, and a serious recruitment and retention crisis has been exacerbated by excessive workloads and real term pay cuts.” “These issues need to be addressed if the Government’s reforms are to have any chance of delivering the skilled workforce needed for a post-Brexit economy.”  

Responding to the Queen’s speech, Kevin Courtney, General Secretary of the National Union of Teachers (NUT), said the Government had made a “grave mistake” in not addressing the school funding crisis. “[Grammar schools] are an unnecessary and unwanted distraction,” he said. “It is now time that Theresa May turns her attention to the real and pressing issue of school funding.” “This was a major issue in the General Election. Schools are not crying wolf, there literally is not enough money for head teachers to run their schools properly.” School spending plans outlined in the Conservative manifesto last month indicated a cut of 7 per cent per pupil, the IFS calculated. Teaching union heads have called for an immediate five per cent increase in funding for “cash starved” schools, college and early years providers, as many providers face having to cut staff due to shortages.  

The government says it will bring forward its proposals on school funding at a later date.    

MPs have argued the government has failed to provide sufficient evidence to show opening new grammar schools would improve social mobility and the quality of education for all pupils.

The Department for Education (DfE) has argued that removing the ban on opening new grammars will be a way of making "more good school places available, to more parents, in more parts of the country". The cross-party committee of MPs, responding to the evidence gathered about plans to increase selective education, said ministers still needed to demonstrate how this would improve social mobility and close the gap between rich and poor pupils. Since Theresa May announced her plans to lift the ban on new grammars brought in under Tony Blair’s government there has not been any details on how this might be implemented.    

Last week the Grammar School Heads’ Association published details of a private meeting with education ministers. The document suggests that new grammar schools could open from 2020 and in the meantime there would £150m allocated to expand existing grammars or to introduce grammar steams through academy trusts. There was also a suggestion that these new grammars would be much more selective than traditional grammars, with places for the top 10% of the ability range. Another idea was that there would be a single national entry test for grammars, rather than a range of local tests, with the aim of designing an exam that would be more resistant to coaching by private tutors. 

A DfE spokeswoman said that grammar schools have a "track record of closing the attainment gap to almost zero between children on free school meals and their better off classmates." The spokeswoman said that "99% of grammar schools are rated good or outstanding; and even when you take higher ability intakes into account pupils still perform better in selective schools than in non-selective schools." Labour's shadow education secretary, Angela Rayner, said: "When even the Conservative-dominated education select committee calls Theresa May's new grammar schools an 'unnecessary distraction', it's time that ministers finally sat up and took notice.” "There is a crisis in teacher recruitment, schools budgets are being cut for the first time in decades and hundreds of thousands of pupils are in super-sized classes.

The Tories should be keeping their pledge to protect school funding rather than pressing ahead with this policy," she said. John Pugh, the Liberal Democrats' education spokesman, said: "Instead of ploughing ahead with these divisive plans, Theresa May should address the £3bn funding black hole facing our schools over the next five years." Sir Peter Lampl, founder of the Sutton Trust, backed the calls for the government to show evidence that new grammars could close the attainment gap - when less than 3% of grammar school entrants are eligible for free school meals. "Until existing grammar schools demonstrate they can be vehicles for social mobility, the number of grammar schools should not be increased," said Sir Peter. Russell Hobby, the general secretary of the National Association of Head Teachers, said the report showed the government had lost the argument on grammar schools and called for a rethink of the policy. “To focus on schools that ignore 90% of the population is a massive distraction. To pour millions of pounds into this system when state school budgets are at breaking point is a terrible use of public funds. No other high-performing education system in the world uses selection at 11. It is too late to counter disadvantage. The government would do better to invest more in early years education, where the evidence shows you can make more of an impact on a child’s future prospects.” “There is strong evidence that selection at 11 damages outcomes overall. There is no support for this from school leaders; the plans to expand selection should be rethought entirely.”