85
instructive to separate as far as possible the notions that subsequent generations have
grafted on with hindsight from the principal issues in the air at the time. Looking back
at the 1944 Act after half a century, McCulloch assessed these issues astutely:
On the positive side, it reflected aspirations for equality of opportunity, political
consensus, and social partnership. Read negatively, it signified the power of
elite groups to manipulate public provision, leading either to entrenched social
divisions and inequality, or to industrial decay and economic atrophy.
(McCulloch 1994: 68)
Certainly the thinking behind the Act came from what could fairly be termed elite
groups. Its philosophical ancestry stems directly from the platonic notion of three
types of learner described in the Taunton Report of 1868, the Hadow (1925) and
Spens (1938) Reports and yet again in the Norwood Report of 1943, its closest
relation. In attempting to follow Ecclestone’s advice about “the importance of
understanding more about individuals that influence policy” (Ecclestone 2002: 174),
it is informative to trace the ideas of Sir Will Spens and Sir Cyril Norwood as they
affected the policy which bears Butler’s name.