Of course, Michael Gove had a point about so called experts but here, from the other side of the spectrum, is an idea that has legs too:

I confess I was concerned that you’ve taken on a job in an area that up until now hasn’t interested you. Looking through your Wikipedia entry, you seem to have focused so far on fireplaces, chinaware, Northern Ireland, car boot sales and aircraft carriers. These are all fascinating areas but for the moment I don’t see a direct link to education. Do you think it would be a good idea if the person in charge of education had expertise in such matters as how young people learn, or what it actually means to assess what a student knows, or which education systems in the world deliver the fairest outcomes for all?

In your political career, you’ve worked as the chair of Conservative students, and deputy chair of Conservative party districts; you’ve been a parliamentary private secretary in the field of transport or working directly to the prime minister, you’ve served as chief whip and, famously, as defence secretary. This is all good ladder-climbing stuff in the adult world and, it has to be said, it’s an effort you’ve made at some distance from schools themselves.

This being Michael Rosen addressing Gavin Williamson.

Well, yes, we see the merit of this idea. Things should be run by people who have a clue about the things they’re running. This clearly meaning that things should not be run by people whose ability is in kissing babies to gain votes. That is, the demand - insistence, preference perhaps - that things be run by those with actual knowledge of the subject under discussion means that things should not be run by politics or politicians.

We’ll sign on to that, yes.