I broadly agree with the conclusions of the document in this area (and others), but taking it to its logical conclusions will involve facing truths that some liberals (especially those more traditionally 'left') will find unpalatable.

If schools are to operate more autonomously, especially in relation to who they employ, then national pay scales have to be dispensed with and, therefore, unions removed from the process.

This should be appealing to good teachers: a central pay system acts against rewarding good performance. Much like in the civil service, what counts in determining pay is 'experience', literally meaning how many years have been put in.

However, if the education system exists to give pupils the best education, then a high-performing recently qualified teacher deserves to be paid more than someone with 20 yrs experience who is not pulling their weight.

The problem is that, if you mention removing central pay, and therefore the unions, to many on the left - including vast numbers of Lib Dems - they will throw up their arms and call you a right-wing headbanger.

The challenge for liberals is to make this case in a way that it appeals to the left as well as the right...

As a governor of a school I think the important issue is to look at the areas in the country where schools face particular challenges and reward teaching staff accordingly.

It seems bizarre that the head of a City Academy - usually in a deprived area - can earn £120,000+ and expect a package of benefits when teachers in the same area receive no real additional rewards for teaching in these circumstances.