Recent figures revealed that many seven-year-olds in the north of England perform below the national average in primary school key stage one tests.

So it seems a safe bet to assume some of these children would be forced to re-sit their final year rather than go on to secondary school under plans being considered by the Tories.

Shadow Schools and Families Secretary Michael Gove is absolutely right to say we cannot have children moving up without the necessary skills to make the most of secondary education.

But is holding them back a year really the right way to go about solving their problems? Or is it just a cheap political attempt to score points in the wake of this year's disappointing key stage one results?

Tory leader David Cameron believes holding children back or sending them to remedial summer schools could form part of a "genuine schools" revolution.

In his eyes, the bold policy will have twin benefits: improving standards and improving discipline.

But what effect would it have on the self-esteem of the children who are held back?

It is hard to see how any improvements made during an extra year at primary school could be carried over to a secondary school. The stigma of being held back will affect these pupils throughout their education.

And with a quarter of all boys failing to reach the most basic reading and writing standards, where are the classrooms that will be needed for these children and who will teach them?

Holding pupils back will place an intolerable burden on primary school teachers.

The Government may have lost its way on education but punishing children for their failure to reach a national standard is not the way ahead.

The only verdict we can deliver on Tory education policy-makers? Must try harder.