Tiger mums for every child? You are much mistaken, Mr Cameron

David Cameron delivered one of his most important speeches on Monday, but, understandably, much of the coverage was lost amid news of the death of David Bowie. This was the sequel to his 2015 party conference speech, and both were written with his departure from Downing Street in mind. He wants to be remembered more for his compassionate, modernising conservatism than whatever the outcome of the EU referendum will be. Good luck with that, as they say. But he should be applauded for his “bucket list” of things to do before he leaves No 10, which has social justice written through it: alleviating poverty, increasing social mobility, tackling extremism and promoting home ownership.

I know he means well when he says that he wants all children to have “tiger mothers”, the ferocious disciplinarian form of parenting described by Amy Chua in her 2011 book, but that is as generous as I can be. First, I just don’t believe that Samantha Cameron, the most liberal person to inhabit Downing Street since Gladstone, is a tiger mother. Second, when he says this ethos of high expectations is the antidote to what he calls the “all must have prizes” culture in state education, he is simply wrong.

I have no experience of private schools, but a lifetime’s of the state sector. My parents were teachers in two of the most disadvantaged areas in the country – Toxteth and Knowsley. I went to state schools in Liverpool; now my five-year-old is at a state primary in south London. There is not, as the Prime Minister claims, an “all must have prizes” culture in state education. There are rewards for success, punishment for bad behaviour and, yes, high expectations.

But the “battle hymn” of the tiger mother is more than just “work, try hard, believe you can succeed, get up and try again”, as the PM put it. There is a corollary for the child who fails: he or she is punished, or threatened with punishment. In my opinion, this is simple cruelty.

If you punish or threaten to punish a child not for being naughty but for failing to get a piano piece right (as Chua detailed in her book), or for struggling to learn the eight times table, it may work in a top public school where pupils already have confidence and entitlement sewn into them like name labels in their blazers. It may also work in high-flying households like those of Chua, whose two children are reportedly happy, well-rounded individuals. But deducting points or removing privileges from a child for getting something wrong or not trying hard enough will result in unhappiness and low self-esteem. Chua herself, in any event, acknowledges that “you have to know your child” and adjust expectations accordingly.

I would make a hopeless tiger mother – I am more a pussy cat parent. When my daughter slumps on to her Year One homework book because it’s 6pm and it’s the fourth night of homework in a row and she can’t think of any more words that begin with s-sound c apart from ceiling, I do not keep her there until 9pm unless she can summon up cenotaph. I help her, and then say, “That’s enough.”

And I know that her teacher won’t punish her for incomplete homework, but give her words of encouragement. This is not “all must have prizes” but nurturing children and giving them the confidence to excel. A child will shine and work hard if he or she is told that what they have done is brilliant.

It is one of the great myths of Cameron’s leadership that the previous Labour government was responsible for “all must have prizes”, which in turn somehow triggered a national problem with standards. There is still, as figures showed yesterday, geographical disparity in education, but that is a long-term issue with many causes. State education in this country is generally excellent. That is not only because of this Government’s policies, but because there has been a gradual improvement since Tony Blair introduced academies.

What’s more, Cameron’s suggestion that parents will see it as “aspirational” to go to parenting classes is strange. Most parents believe they are doing right for their child, and the “bad” parents – who, let’s be clear, will be from all social classes, from the neglectful earl who barely speaks to his daughter to the mother who repeatedly lets her son skip school – are unlikely to sign up. Children succeed when they are loved and encouraged, or at least that’s what this pussy cat parent believes.