It's not so long ago [last May in fact] that I opined to a shocked Jonathan Dimbleby, sadly live on air on Any Answers that school governors were a "bunch of untrained amateurs". I am pleased to see that Michael Wilshaw was obviously listening and now has suggested that some governors should indeed be professionals.
Does this mean that events' managers, lawyers and local shopkeepers not being allowed anymore to sell off public land and public buildings for absolutely nothing will come to an end? Does this mean that governors might have some previous in education? Maybe even they could even be obliged to visit the school during the working day before pronouncing judgment on what happens in it and to it.
But Michael, aren't you the person who suggested that if teachers were scared, then heads were doing their jobs properly. Or was it if schools were scared then Ofsted was on point? Whatever it was, Michael, it was about setting sister against sister and brother against brother. And do you know, I never expected the Spanish Inquistion. I thought it was just a joke.
These proposed professional governors - I can't help wondering about how they might be chosen, and what their political bias might be. And Michael, who gets to pay their wages? Call me sceptical but, . . . . . actually just call me sceptical.