Question: You said you will raise the proportion of national income on education. The Lib Dems are committed to increasing spending on education by £3.5 billion. They've gazumped you haven't they?

Jacqui Smith: Well, our record shows that we did what we said we would do. We have increased the share of national income spent on education and will increase it further in the next parliament. And in fact of course, what the Lib Dems said at the last election was that they would put a penny on income tax and spend that on education. Well, because of the way that we have created a more successful and more stable economy, we have actually been able to invest far more than the Lib Dems ever dreamed of in 1997.

Question: One of your key pledges is to recruit 10,000 new teachers. the Lib Dems have pledged to recruit 17,500 new teachers. Yet again, they've gone one better than you?

Jacqui Smith: Except of course, it is unlikely they are going to be pushing these things into operation and what is important if you look at our record is that. We have actually succeeded in getting an extra 11,100 teachers into our schools since 1997, we are pledged and we have got the money to employ at least 10,000 extra teachers in our schools by 2006, and also an extra 20,000 other support staff as well, who will also be very important in improving the adult - pupil ratio, and of course, in this election, the real choice is between a Labour government pledged to increase the number of teachers and support staff and to continue raising standards, and a Tory government pledged to make £20 billion worth of public spending cuts that would ensure that not only do we not increase the number of teachers and raise standards, but we will actually see those falling.

Question: So do you think the Lib Dems couldn't really deliver 17, 500 new teachers?

Jacqui Smith: No I said, I don't think the Lib Dems were going to be in government to be tested. I think that we have set an achievable target. We have said at least 10,000 extra teachers in our schools. We have proved by our record in the last four years, that we are willing to invest in our schools and invest in our teaching profession in a way that has already delivered 11,100 extra teachers into our classrooms.

Question: Well, lets look at teachers. Teaching unions argue that you have increased their workload and red tape. What will you be doing about that?

Jacqui Smith: Of course, we have already begun to take action for example, on paper work. We are delivering our pledge to cut by half the amount of paper that is going into schools this year, but we also need to find new ways, as we have been to support the work of teachers in the classroom. Which is why the extra 44,000 support staff that are in our schools now over 1997 are important. They are helping both to raise standards in the classroom and to free up teachers from some of the administrative tasks that I certainly know from my 11 years as a teacher do dog you, when you are trying to raise standards.

We have made the national curriculum more flexible. We have increased the amount of electronic communication with teachers that we do. And some of the things, I really would challenge some of our opponents on some of the things that they have called bureaucracy, a guide to help teachers writing for example, is part of the paper that has gone into schools this year. Schemes of work to help teachers to organise their teaching in the most effective way. Are people really suggesting that we shouldn't be providing that sort of practical support for our teachers? The teachers I talk to aren't saying that. Some of our political opponents are suggesting that we should be cutting those things.

Question: Teachers are calling for a greater power to expel disruptive pupils. Would you go along with that?

Jacqui Smith: David Blunkett and I have made it completely clear, that where a child is disruptive, it is of course the right of the head teacher to exclude that child.

But I think we need to remember the history of exclusions over the last 10 years. In the beginning of the 1990s, there were about 3,000 children a year being excluded. By the time we got to 1997 that had gone up to nearer 12,000 children. The problem was of course, that whilst headteachers may have felt that was getting rid of a problem from their classrooms and speaking as a teacher I can understand, and I certainly don't want to see disruptive children in our schools, disturbing children's learning. Those children were getting two/three hours teaching a week and of course were then causing mayhem in their communities as well as not getting the sort of education they needed for their future.

What we have done, we have increased the amount of money ten times that schools now have to spend on dealing with disruptive behaviour and truancy. We have set up 1,000 in-school units so that disruptive children can be taken out of the classroom quickly and effectively without actually having to exclude them from the school. And where head teachers do have to exclude them, we have supported them in that decision, we have changed the guidance to appeals panel suggesting that they shouldn't return children to school who have been violent or extremely disruptive, and we have ensured that where children are excluded, they will be getting a full time education in a pupil referral unit, rather than simply being thrown on to the streets to continue causing trouble for communities and for themselves.

Question: You have promised a radical modernisation of secondary schools. What exactly do you mean by that?

Jacqui Smith: Well, what we have seen over the last four years, is the literacy and numeracy strategy. Through the extra support that has gone into our schools, primary results have increased significantly. We now want to take forward that reform into our secondary schools. It means for example, focusing on the first three years in the secondary stage, Key Stage Three, in order to make sure that we develop the very best teaching approaches and we share those between teachers.

But it also means building on the success of specialist schools. We have trebled the number of specialist schools, but we want to increase that to at least 1500 by 2006.

Question: Some people describe specialist schools as semi grammars?

Jacqui Smith: No, they are not. At a maximum they could select 10 per cent of their students by aptitude rather than by ability. And what we have actually seen in the development of specialist schools is that the vast majority of them have decided not to select at all. It is a comprehensive school, but it is a comprehensive school that is successful. That focuses on its specialisms, but then raises standards across the whole of the curriculum and for all the children in its area.

Question: You have promised more money and powers for headteachers. But the Conservatives propose free schools, where heads and governors have complete responsibility for running their schools. Haven't the Conservatives gazumped you in freeing up management in schools?

Jacqui Smith: Well, we haven't just promised extra money and responsibility to head teachers. We have already delivered on it. An extra billion pounds delegated to schools, head teachers now are running their schools, and they are running them successfully, we have made direct grants available to head teachers, and we will carry on providing greater funding to head teachers, and greater autonomy for successful schools.

What the Conservatives have failed to answer, are a whole range of questions on their free schools policy. The figures of extra money they are suggesting can go to schools don't add up. It devolves schools taking responsibility for their school transport. It would take away the LEA role in providing for children with special needs. Head teachers have told us in recent surveys that that is not something that they want to happen. The conservative plans would open the door to a free for all in terms of admissions. It would certainly open the door to children not being able to get into their local schools. So the Conservatives have certainly not proved that their ill thought out free schools policy would continue the improvements in standards that this government has already delivered and which we are pledged to continue delivering if we get back into power.

Question: You say in your manifesto, we will allow greater investment in schools by outside organisations. What does that mean?

Jacqui Smith: What that means is that where for example it would be appropriate for a school perhaps because it is failing or where it needs extra investment to have a partnership with a private or a voluntary sector organisation, we will encourage that. There will be new city academies in some of our inner city areas where schools have really failed to deliver for those children, bringing together a partnership of the head teacher, of the education authority and of private and voluntary organisations there, to perhaps bringing new management to turn round those schools. As David Blunkett has said, we are not going to just sit back and wring our hands when schools are letting our children down, we are willing to take whatever action is necessary in order to ensure that we are delivering those standards for all our children, wherever they go to school.

Question: So you see an expanding role for private sector management for certain schools?

Jacqui Smith: What we have said is that we will look at the situation with relation to a school, but we won't rule out allowing partnerships with the private sector where that is going to lead to higher standards for the children in those schools.

Question: You have promised not to introduce top up fees. The Lib Dems have pledged to abolish tuition fees. Yet again - they've gone one better than you again?

Jacqui Smith: Well we have made it very clear that we are not going to introduce top up fees. Our reform of student finance has enabled us to invest for the first time, real sums of money into our higher education and to open opportunities for children, for young people to get into university. That is why we are able to pledge that we will enable 50 per cent of our young people under the age of 30 to progress to higher education by 2010, while also improving standards in our universities.

Question: Universities UK say there is a £900 million shortfall to meet this student funding. How are you going to meet that?

Jacqui Smith: We have already ensured that there is more money in real terms going into our universities over the four years that we have been in government. By taking the tough decisions and reforming student finance in the way that we have, we will be able to ensure that that real increase continues. And of course we will be working with universities, with the universities UK to look at the sort of resources that are available. But what is clear as far as universities are concerned is that it would be a Labour government that will be investing in opening up access and improving standards in our universities, while the Conservatives have pledged to privatise them.

Question: Finally, what will you do about the mounting debts for students?

Jacqui Smith: Well, the evidence shows that there are more students being able to go to university. We have already looked at the way we can help those students who are facing particular hardships, and who of course in the past were never often able to go to university, lone parents, mature students, and we will help those young people and older people, to get the benefit of a university education.