A party political that can bring joy? 'Never? ' Watch this from the Greens...

How the hell did they get away with it? Michael Rosen explains

I thought this Facebook post by Michael Rosen would be of interest to readers:

How the hell did they get away with it?

Call me naive or stupid but when the financial crash came I will admit here and now that I thought that because, for the first time in my lifetime, that 

a) the workings of capitalism had been laid bare in a way that they had never been before,
b) as people found that their standard of living was being cut and c) as people found that their hard-won and precious public services and welfare was being cut too, people would be outraged in ways that we had never seen before.

I confess I imagined that people would perhaps occupy their places of work, or their public services institutions - hospitals, schools, social services offices in order to defend them. I imagined that people across public and private industries would find that they had common interests in defending their standard of living. After all, I reasoned, as never before, the nakedness of capital (finance) screwing up all on its own, with no excuses that they had been driven into a corner by 'high wage demands' or 'trade unions holding them to ransom' and the like, would make it clear to us all that there is a difference between money and wealth - money being the stuff that rich people play with in order to keep themselves rich and wealth being the stuff that we need and make to keep ourselves safe and warm and productive.

But how wrong could I have been? And why or how has it turned out that I was so wrong?

1. It has been possible for very powerful people - politicians and news media - to repeat over and over again that the 'mess' or the 'crisis' was caused by one political party which happened to be in power at the time of the most severe point in that crisis - namely the Labour Party of GB, even though the crash was (and still is) global and was caused by financiers taking risks that were…er…too risky.

2. It has been possible to keep the illusion going that the 'remedies' put in place to put things back together, are fair and just - even though they are nothing but a simple system of redistributing wealth from the poor to the rich. The richest 1000 people increased their wealth last year by over £40 billion while the poorest have seen their income (or standard of living) cut. The proportion of money earned by waged people in relation to money acquired by owners of capital has shifted and is shifting in favour of capital.

3. Interventions like £350 billion of quantitative easing ('printing money') have enriched the rich with hardly a murmur from those with the megaphones whose social duty was to tell us about it.

4. A constant burble over the last five years about the 'deficit' and 'balancing the books' and 'paying our way' has been like a mass education force telling us that
a) the deficit must be reduced or we will all go to hell in a handcart
b) the people in power are dramatically reducing it and this is improving our lives
c) we must re-elect them so that they can go on doing what they've been doing to reduce it further.

It has made very little difference that some people to repeat that a deficit can be productive in any economic system if it is used to invest in producing things we need, that demolishing public services has had a double effect of harming thousands of people's lives whilst handing over what remains of the services to subsidiaries of the super-rich.

It has made very little difference that some people have pointed out that the deficit is at levels we were told at the outset were unsustainable or impossible.

It has made very little difference that some people have pointed out that low income (engineered by the government) has two results:
a) people don't earn enough to pay enough taxes to lower the deficit and
b) people will borrow money to supplement their income…which is part of why the whole thing unravelled last time.

5. The 'economy' will recover.

The nineteenth century bearded chap pointed out that in a recession prices will eventually fall to a level at which the people who own and control capital will think once again that it's a good time to invest and produce and distribute. In the meantime, their cycle of boom and bust involves making the lives of the mass of people worse. This period of worsening standards of living can never be given back. They happen, they endure. The damage is done to people's minds and bodies and to the ways in which we hang together. Rich people - even the few who take a small hit in a recession - don't experience this. They have a bit less than a lot. The poor have less than very little. Even though people know this and feel this, it is possible to keep them from despair and anger by constantly suggesting that

a) it would be even worse if you let back in those terrible people who 'caused it' last time,
b) it's going to be better for you next year…er…when we cut £12 billion from services that you need and rely on…(not!)

6. Another useful way to distract people from the core fact that money is being transferred from the poor to the rich in the name of 'balancing the books' is to encourage or allow a story to be told over and over again about 'immigrants'. The truth of the matter is that the great cycles of boom and bust are not caused by a few hundred thousand people swapping countries. More often than not, it's a symptom and not a cause. If politicians were honest, helpful people they would spend a great deal of time explaining to us the benefits and drawbacks of the system they believe in - capitalism.

They love gassing on about all the benefits of innovation, competition and the like but hardly ever explain what 'bust' is all about. An honest advocate of capitalism might spend time explaining to us that, yes, it's a system that does demand that at times the poorest have to be poorer so that capitalists can go on making profits, because that's how the system works. Hello, they would say, we compete with each other, we try to cut costs, even as we have to invest loads of dosh in order to stay modern.

But no, instead, they allow or encourage all sorts of half-truths and lies to circulate in order to 'explain' why times are tough for millions of people. So, in one bust you'll see the bust explained by the fact that the workers have all been greedy and lazy, their pay too high, their holidays too long, their pensions too big. Another time, this story will be modified by saying that the hospitals, schools, social services cost too much. And another time the story is that the problem is what's going on abroad somewhere so the only solution is to go and bomb and kill hundreds of thousands of 'foreigners'. And another time, it's because 'we' are being 'swamped' by 'foreigners'.

These are all very potent lies to cover up for the fact that what makes people poor is employers paying working people less. And if they were honest, they would say that, yes, that IS what they do, and it's what they need to do in order for them to stay rich (i.e. make profits). But they don't.

7. So, in some ways, a time of reflection. As I write this, I suppose there is every chance that the Tories will win a few more seats than Labour. This may well mean that there will be another coalition - though it might be one that does not have a full majority. This means that there are certain kinds of legislation that could be defeated by the rest - unless Labour do that classic thing of saying that they are being 'statesmanlike' and supporting legislation which they don't agree with and which damage the majority of the people's standards of living. This will happen if, in the case of a Labour defeat, Miliband is replaced by someone from the Blairite rump.

Protest against Brent budget cuts Monday 6.30pm Brent Civic Centre

Brent Fightback will be demonstrating outside the Civic Centre on Monday at 6.30pm as councillors prepare to vote on a budget that will see the closure of the Stonebridge Adventure Playground, the beginning of the likely end of Energy Solutions, the closure of the Welsh Harp Environmental Education Centre (unless Careys come up with the goods) and the shifting of the cost of school crossing patrols from the Council to individual schools (if the schools agree to spend their money on them).

Last weekend Brent Fightback presented an invoice to the Liberal Democrat and Conservative offices in Brent for the money taken from Brent Council since the Coalition took office.

Brent Fightback Final Demand to Coalition: Give us Back Our Money

Outside Sarah Teather's Office in Willesden Green

Outside the Brent North Conservative Office in Preston Road, Wembley

Brent Fightback supporters today presented Brent Liberal Democrats and Conservatives with a 'Final Demand' for the £142,900,000 that the Coalition  will have cut from Brent Council's budget over the current period.

This has meant cuts in valuable Council services that will hit the young, the poor, the vulnerable and the elderly.

Those making the demand included independent local activists and residents and members of the Labour, Green and Socialist Workers parties.

Copies of the Final Demand were posted through the letter boxes of the offices.

Claim back our cash: Reclaim our Services! - Coalition to be invoiced tomorrow by Brent campaigners

Brent Fightback will be presenting an Invoice to local represenatives of the Coalition partners tomorrow for all the money that has been taken away from Brent residents through the cuts in local government funding.  Fightback encourages local people, suffering from the cuts, to join them for just a few minutes at Willesden Green (2pm) or Preston Road (3pm) or both.

Brent North to consider how Labour should decide Coalition arrangements

With most commentators expecting a hung parliament after the General Election it is not surprising that all the parties are considering who they would ally with, as a formal Coalition or on a Supply and Confidence basis.

The issue is likely to be discussed by members at the Green Party Spring Conference March 6th-9th in Liverpool. For those who remember the Harold Wilson governments just one or two votes can make a difference. Tory leader Edward Health failed to negotiate a Coalition with the Liberals in 1974 and Wilson led a minority Labour government. After Labour's numbers were hit by by-election defeats a Lib-Lab Pact was agreed in March 1977.

Brent North General Meeting on Thursday will be discussing a draft motion for consideration by Constituency Labour Parties and it is interesting, in the context of the story below about the Brent Council Tax decision, that it focuses on how, and by whom such decisions are made:

This GC recognises that, whilst we all seek and expect a majority Labour government in May, a possible outcome of the election is that it may be necessary to consider a coalition or other forms of cooperation with other parties. This GC notes that the last time Labour was involved in a coalition at Westminster between 1941 and 1945, the proposal to do so was made by the party leader for the approval of both the NEC and the party conference. This GC therefore urges the NEC to agree without delay the procedure which will be used for seeking the party`s approval which, we believe , should include both the involvement of relevant elected bodies including the NEC itself in approving any arrangement, national policy forum policy commissions in approving any policy agreements with other parties, and a half-day recall party conference to approve any recommendations of the national executive. 

Brent North last month passed a resolution questioning Ed Balls' 'austerity lite' approach to public spending LINK

At that meeting concerns were also raised over Safeguarding, recruitment of social workers, health and safety in schools, reduction in care for the elderly (especially those with mental health problems), stopping the free bulk collection and the decline in the service provided by Brent Housing Partnership with some residents waiting a long time for replacement windows.

Brent North CLP want to see rethink of Ed Balls' austerity-lite strategy

Ed Balls reacts to the Brent North motion (not really!)

As the Green Party positions itself as the only anti-austerity party in the forthcoming General Election, and recruits hundreds of  ex Labour voters, many in the Labour Party are dismayed that Ed Balls seems to be painting them into an 'austerity-lite' corner.

Locally this has emerged in a motion tabled by Labour veteran Colin Adams at Brent North Labour Constituency Party General Meeting last Thursday.

The motion claimed that Balls' approach is 'hardly designed to  win over any of our potential voters who may be wavering, as it send a message that there is not much to choose between the main parties in their approach to austerity and its impact on the welfare state.'

I couldn't have put it better myself.

This is the full text as tabled:

Brent North CLP is extremely concerned that the Coalition government`s cuts to public sector spending are causing huge damage to the fabric of the welfare state. The Coalition parties have shown that their policies are not governed by economic necessity but by ideology. They are committed to shrinking the role of the state and allowing public services to be taken over by the market. In Brent, as in other councils, impossible decisions about which services should be prioritised for cuts are being forced upon local politicians.

Labour must go into the upcoming election with policies that show clear differences with the Coalition parties, otherwise there is a grave danger we will not win an overall majority. In particular we need to show that we are prepared to fund local services adequately.

We were thus dismayed at the recent statement by the shadow chancellor, Ed Balls, that the election of a Labour government would not necessarily lead to an easing of the pressure on public services. This approach is hardly designed to win over any of our potential voters who may be wavering, as it sends a message that there is not much to choose between the main parties in their approach to austerity and its impact on the welfare state. It is electorally damaging to say we are going to stick with the existing government`s spending plans.

We call on the Labour leadership to rethink this strategy and state that, upon  the election of a Labour government, a new budget will be drawn up for immediate implementation with the aim of reflating the economy and protecting public services.                   

Season's Greetings to Wembley Matters' readers and contributors

Jean Bonnin www.banana-meinhoff.com

Wembley Matters is taking a seasonal break now.

Can I take this opportunity to thank everyone who has contributed to this blog as Guest Bloggers, commenters and readers as well as those who have supplied information by email, phone and post.

I hope that in 2015 we can get ride of the Coalition and start reclaiming our public services and dedicate them to the common good.

It is imperative that we lift up our eyes and recognise that we must redouble our efforts to persuade the international community and its politicians to tackle the climate crisis.

Brighton and Hove Council grapples with 'immoral' impact of Coalition cuts on the city

It is becoming clear that the continuing cuts in local government funding means that many councils will be unable to maintain basic services in the years ahead and some may face severe financial problems if not bankruptcy. Cuts in funding for adult social care to be announced by central government make the situation worse.

Against that background Brighton and Hove Council, a minority Green administration, released the statement below today. It is sure to spark a debate within the Green Party and the wider left about what a council should do in such circumstances:

Laying out the background to the budget, Councillor Ollie Sykes, Green lead member for finance, said: "The bulk of the council's general fund money each year comes from central government and over the past four years the coalition government has cut its funding to us by a frightening 32% in cash terms. After taking into account inflation and increasing demand, this means we have £70m less this year, for services, than when we came into office.

"And with council tax held down below inflation - which means it has fallen by 12% in real terms - the rest of the council's income cannot even begin to make up the shortfall.

"Other councils have also been cut, though historically Brighton & Hove has been cut hardest in the south east. And other councils are not coping: many have closed essential services, from libraries to welfare services, and the National Audit Office last week reported that more than half of councils in England are at of risk financial failure within the next five years. This week, Newcastle has warned of 'impossible cuts leading to social unrest'."

Councillor Sykes continued:

"Until now, Brighton & Hove has escaped what other cities are suffering. This Green administration has ensured that only a very small fraction of those cuts have so far been passed on to the front line of council services.

"We've done it by getting the basics right, managing resources, rooting out inefficiency, greening the council's building stock, and with great support and hard work from council staff. We've kept all libraries and children's centres open, imposed no compulsory redundancies on council employees, continued a fair proportion of financial support for the third sector and even increased spending for the city's most vulnerable. We've also brought in unprecedented external funding to for city improvements, such as The Level and Seven Dials.

"This year is different. The government cuts are so huge and there's nothing left to squeeze. It means that business will no longer be as usual. Unlike the past, some council services will have to shrink or go. There will be redundancies and there will be protests against those redundancies.

This is what coalition government cuts are now about to do to our city."

Turning to the Greens' response, Councillor Sykes says:

"This is not a budget we're proud to see before us. But we can't print money or ask officers to spend what we don't have. Despite everything, though, we are doing what we can as a minority administration.

"Over the coming weeks, we will be calling on the government to reinstate our full grant and examining all possible ways to put the pressure on. We hope our Labour and Conservative colleagues will join us, for the sake of the city. What the coalition is doing to our most vulnerable residents and our communities is frankly immoral.

"We are asking the city to approve our proposals for a general 5.9% rise in council tax. This will not solve the problem but it will raise more than £4m to help maintain crucial services and avoid the imposition of a much sharper tax rise for the most hard-up people in the city.

"And we are making a series of pledges to keep open such core council services as libraries, children's centres and public toilets, to protect the city's most vulnerable from the worst of the cuts and not to introduce anything that will contribute to the further transfer of wealth from the least well off to the wealthiest in this country."

Caroline Lucas MP for Brighton Pavilion has tabled an Early Day Motion on the cuts to try and initiate a debate in the House of Commons in December:

• This House believes, under the guise of austerity, central government is slowly but surely putting an end to local government as we know it;
• Notes that from 2010/11 to 2015/16, core central government funding to local authorities has been slashed by 40%, whilst local government responsibilities increase; further notes demand for council services is growing and people are suffering under Government policies harming the poorest and most disadvantaged such as the bedroom tax, cuts to tax credits and benefits and the increase in VAT;
• Further notes the National Audit Office report criticising the Government for failing to properly assess the effects of further cuts to funding of councils by central government and the cross-party Local Government Association warning over plans to stop funding Local Welfare Assistance Schemes that “If the government pulls the plug on funding, many local authorities will be unable to afford to make up the difference at a time when we are tackling the biggest cuts to council funding in living memory” which will cause three-quarters of councils to scale back or scrap their schemes;
• Therefore calls for the cuts to local Government funding to be reversed and for local government to be protected from further cuts to enable local authorities to provide cherished community services as well as vital social services such as support for looked-after children, care-leavers, users of adult social care, older people, homeless people, low-income families in crisis, disabled people, those with special educational needs and emergency help to survivors of domestic violence. 

Notes
Brighton and Hove singled-out for cuts: LINK
Laying out the background to the budget, Councillor Ollie Sykes, Green lead member for finance, said: "The bulk of the council's general fund money each year comes from central government and over the past four years the coalition government has cut its funding to us by a frightening 32% in cash terms. After taking into account inflation and increasing demand, this means we have £70m less this year, for services, than when we came into office.

"And with council tax held down below inflation - which means it has fallen by 12% in real terms - the rest of the council's income cannot even begin to make up the shortfall.

"Other councils have also been cut, though historically Brighton & Hove has been cut hardest in the south east. And other councils are not coping: many have closed essential services, from libraries to welfare services, and the National Audit Office last week reported that more than half of councils in England are at of risk financial failure within the next five years. This week, Newcastle has warned of 'impossible cuts leading to social unrest'."

Councillor Sykes continued:
"Until now, Brighton & Hove has escaped what other cities are suffering. This Green administration has ensured that only a very small fraction of those cuts have so far been passed on to the front line of council services.

"We've done it by getting the basics right, managing resources, rooting out inefficiency, greening the council's building stock, and with great support and hard work from council staff. We've kept all libraries and children's centres open, imposed no compulsory redundancies on council employees, continued a fair proportion of financial support for the third sector and even increased spending for the city's most vulnerable. We've also brought in unprecedented external funding to for city improvements, such as The Level and Seven Dials.

"This year is different. The government cuts are so huge and there's nothing left to squeeze. It means that business will no longer be as usual. Unlike the past, some council services will have to shrink or go. There will be redundancies and there will be protests against those redundancies.

This is what coalition government cuts are now about to do to our city."

Turning to the Greens' response, Councillor Sykes says:

"This is not a budget we're proud to see before us. But we can't print money or ask officers to spend what we don't have. Despite everything, though, we are doing what we can as a minority administration.

"Over the coming weeks, we will be calling on the government to reinstate our full grant and examining all possible ways to put the pressure on. We hope our Labour and Conservative colleagues will join us, for the sake of the city. What the coalition is doing to our most vulnerable residents and our communities is frankly immoral.

"We are asking the city to approve our proposals for a general 5.9% rise in council tax. This will not solve the problem but it will raise more than £4m to help maintain crucial services and avoid the imposition of a much sharper tax rise for the most hard-up people in the city.

"And we are making a series of pledges to keep open such core council services as libraries, children's centres and public toilets, to protect the city's most vulnerable from the worst of the cuts and not to introduce anything that will contribute to the further transfer of wealth from the least well off to the wealthiest in this country."

Caroline Lucas MP for Brighton Pavilion has tabled an Early Day Motion on the cuts to try and initiate a debate in the House of Commons in December:

• This House believes, under the guise of austerity, central government is slowly but surely putting an end to local government as we know it;
• Notes that from 2010/11 to 2015/16, core central government funding to local authorities has been slashed by 40%, whilst local government responsibilities increase; further notes demand for council services is growing and people are suffering under Government policies harming the poorest and most disadvantaged such as the bedroom tax, cuts to tax credits and benefits and the increase in VAT;
• Further notes the National Audit Office report criticising the Government for failing to properly assess the effects of further cuts to funding of councils by central government and the cross-party Local Government Association warning over plans to stop funding Local Welfare Assistance Schemes that “If the government pulls the plug on funding, many local authorities will be unable to afford to make up the difference at a time when we are tackling the biggest cuts to council funding in living memory” which will cause three-quarters of councils to scale back or scrap their schemes;
• Therefore calls for the cuts to local Government funding to be reversed and for local government to be protected from further cuts to enable local authorities to provide cherished community services as well as vital social services such as support for looked-after children, care-leavers, users of adult social care, older people, homeless people, low-income families in crisis, disabled people, those with special educational needs and emergency help to survivors of domestic violence. 

Notes
Brighton and Hove singled-out for cuts: LINK
Leader of Newcastle council decries impossible cuts and warns of social unrest: LINK

Brent Council reported to intend to rent out space commercially at new Willesden Cultural Centre instead of providing a One Stop Shop

A Brent Council officer told a recent meeting of the Willesden Green Town Meeting that there would be no One Stop Shop at the new Willesden Cultural Centre.  Instead the Council would be looking for a commercial tenant for the space.

This follows the Council's decision to let two floors of the Civic Centre to Air Francis and squeeze Brent staff into the remaining space.

During the controversial planning application process for the WG Cultural Centre the Council made great play of the benefit to the community that would accrue from the development of unafffordable private flats (later sold on the Singapore market). The developement would finance the Cultural Centre and the One Stop Shop, along with council offices to serve the local area and this  out-weighed the loss of the old library, car park and open space according to  ex Executive member Cllr George Crane, then lead member for Regeneration and Major Projects.

This is an extract from Andy Donald's (Director Regeneneration and Major Projects) report:

4.6 The Council is currently driven by the overarching concept of One Council. This aims to provide excellent public services and deliver these in the most efficient way but also to build strong relationships and better communications between the Council and citizens ensuring local priorities are addressed and that local potential is nurtured. A redeveloped WGLC will play an important role in this strategy supporting both the One Council Library Transformation Project and the One Council Future Customer Service Project.

4.8 The Future Customer Service Project aims to improve efficiency and clarity of the services offered to citizens. The strategy is dependent on developing a new customer contact centre at WGLC providing a service for the south of the borough, an area where many of the Council‟s high need customers reside.

The Council appeared to have been driven, through the Council's budget crisis caused by Coalition cuts, to reneage on its promises to local people, especially those who formed the Keep Willesden Green campaign.

Residents were angry and asked if the Council intended to put these changes to what was supposed to be a local amenity to further consultation.

I understand that Andy Donald has replied that no decision on customer services at the Cultural Centre has been made but 'the Council’s cabinet will be considering a report in October in respect of the overall approach to customer access for the Council as a whole, which will then inform the shape of the customer access offer at the Civic Centre and Willesden going forward.'

He has promised that residents will be informed about any proposals as part of the dialogue over the use of the  new building.

Clearly an issue that residents will be monitoring.

Meanwhile someone who lives on the front line of the development told me earlier this week that a construction worker on site had told her that the open space between the flats and the Cultural Centre, offered in compensation for the lost open space in front of the 1980s library, was just going to be an 'ordinary road'.

I would be interested if anyone else had heard this.

COPLAND IS GETTING GOVE’S ‘REVERSE -TROJAN -HORSE’ TREATMENT

Guest blog by Will Shaw

Whatever the rights and wrongs of the case, the bizarre events surrounding the Birmingham ‘Trojan Horse’ schools should have finally made clear that Ofsted exists to give the government the inspection reports it requires to support whatever its  schools strategy happens to be at any particular time. If the inspectors don’t come up with the right report they can be sent back into schools until they do. This is not usually necessary as the inspectors know what is expected of them and they dutifully supply it. Their lack of integrity or principled independence of thought can be measured by their deafening silence in objecting to this role over the years  and the extreme rarity of any individual resignations.

Ofsted inspections are a key weapon in the government’s overriding aim of ultimately turning  all (state) schools into centrally-run academies and  taking them out of local democratic accountability.  Once Ofsted supplies the government with the ‘appropriate’ inspection report on a school, the next stage is special measures, the imposition from outside of a non-accountable IEB  and forced academisation. This is the stage Copland has been at since last September. 

Obviously, this stage in the process has to appear  to be both necessary and beneficial and it’s Ofsted again which is used to show how much schools like Copland  improve as a result of the government’s wise policies. At Copland, if the inspectors are to be believed, the beneficial results of government policy were almost instantaneous. Their report after last November’s visit spoke of  the school having ‘turned a corner’ and ‘students making better progress’. It continued ‘ teaching …..attendance and punctuality are improving’, ‘students are keen to learn’, ‘ there has been a sea-change in the pace of improvement’, ‘the interim headteacher and associate headteacher and very strong governance of the IEB are driving this change well’ and so on; and all this after only 6 weeks! The nature of the narrative had been set. 

March 2014’s Copland report took the hagiography to the next level:  ‘… the  headteacher of St Paul’s Way is an astute Chair of the Interim Executive Board….. IEB members are asking the right questions about the school’s performance.. balanced in the rigour of challenge and in the quality of their support. Senior leaders are ‘stepping up to the plate’ more …. having greater impact on the work of the school ……... responding well to the high level of challenge being laid down by school leaders and the IEB... ……more accurate understanding of students’ needs  ……..higher expectations for students……  behaviour is much improved and the school is a more respectful place…… zero tolerance to poor behaviour … ….. an attitude of respect between and among students and staff……more confident and articulate learners. …….a richer quality of teaching…..teaching is better… lessons are more structured’. Clearly carried away with the spirit of the thing, the reporting inspector at one point came over all Mills and Boon and, revealing  a bureaucrat’s tin ear for the speech patterns of 21^st century London youth,   wrote this:

 ‘One student, capturing the views of many, said, ‘We can see hope now.’ This new-found optimism is palpable’.  

 (I like to imagine the inspector considering whether to  attribute the final 6 words to this ‘student’ as well, but wisely deciding that this might be pushing it a bit). 

It’s difficult not to laugh (if only at the writers’ belief that they could get away with this tosh) but many teachers and pupils have worked very hard at Copland this year and it’s a pity that any truth which these Ofsted reports might contain is tarnished by the relentless gung-ho bollocks  of the rest of it. But then, establishing  the truth is not at all what these inspections are about. How could they be when 2 inspectors come in for a day and a half and watch 10 or 15 minutes of a few lessons?  No, as in Birmingham their function is to provide bogus supporting evidence for actions already decided on. In the case of Copland, we are being provided with the  narrative of the ‘saving’ of a school by Gove, forced academisation, ‘tough’ but necessary action, (60 staff and half the curriculum axed), and finally the salvation that is The Ark Rescue.  

It’s a satisfying narrative  so far and it will be interesting to see how far the Ofsted inspectors think they can push it when the report on their imminent final visit comes out in a few weeks time.  As the purpose of the report is pre-determined and as the inspectors know what is expected of them (and  also know that their continuing employment depends on their coming up with the goods), the report  might as well have been written last September. If it was, I hope they don’t change anything if they , by chance, should come across this blog. And if they’re looking for further fictional inspiration, what better place than in the sort of book that, if he’d ever read it, Michael Gove would surely have banned, if only for the fact that it isn’t even really a decent, proper, stout English novel but rather some thin, poncey, foreign-sounding thing called a ‘novella’: Animal Farm.

“It has become usual in Wembley to give Mr Gove, Michael Pavey, the IEB, the Interim Headteacher and the Associate Headteacher  the credit for every successful achievement and every stroke of good fortune at the school. You will often hear one pupil remark to another, “Under the guidance of our Senior Leadership Team  I have progressed  five levels in six months” or two teachers, enjoying a drink at the staffroom water-cooler, will exclaim, “thanks to the leadership of Headteacher  Marshall and  Associate Headteacher John, how excellent this water tastes!”...” (With apologies to  George Orwell).

The next Copland Ofsted visit is ‘imminent’  and the inspector’s report will be published in a few week’s time. But please remember, and thanks to Martin, you read it here first.

Greens: The debate is over-act now on Climate Change

THE Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) report’s stark warnings of the dire consequences of our continuing failure to tackle climate change on planet and people must act as a wake-up call, says the Green Party, the only party with workable policies in place to mitigate the threat and adapt for a sustainable future.

Climate change has already cut into the global food supply and is fuelling wars and natural disasters, but governments are unprepared to protect those most at risk, says the report (1) released today (31 March 2014) from the UN's climate science panel. 

Commenting on the publication today, Natalie Bennett, Green Party Leader, said: 

“The scientific debate is over. Climate change is a reality, here, with us today. Its threat is enormous and can no longer be ignored. 

“On climate change, governments are taking too little action too slowly in part because they are overly and unduly influenced by oil, coal and gas big business interests. In Britain, we also have a government that is incapable of understanding that the old economic model is broken and needs to be radically changed, as it is not only incompatible with dealing with climate change, but also failing to meet people's basic needs.

"The Coalition Government’s flag-waving for fracking, which will only accelerate global warming, is the latest in a long line of destructive decisions driven by corporate interest with scant regard for the negative impact on people and planet.

“Climate change and the state of our environment is going to be one of THE issues of the European election on May 22 – and it’s only the Green group, already the fourth largest in the European parliament – who are going to put it truly front and centre.

“Greens are going to hold firm on fighting for a national renewables target for each European state, demanding that Europe provide global leadership in setting a target of provide global leadership in setting a target of at THE VERY least a 50% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by 2030, and demanding high, binding energy efficiency standards.”

A Green government will take bold, responsible and scientifically credible action to avoid catastrophic climate change. We will apply a contraction and convergence strategy to reduce emissions to a safe and equal per-capita level. Pursuing the necessary annual reductions of around 10% will create many jobs. We will provide free monthly carbon emission allowances and people wanting to use more than their fair share could trade allowances. Total emissions will be capped and will reduce each year in line with our 2030 emission reduction target of 90% on 1990 levels.

Giving a voice to child casualties of the callous Coalition on Saturday

I heard recently about a child who faced exclusion from a local academy school because of recent lateness. He is late because the family were evicted from their home and moved to temporary accommodation in a bed and breakfast hotel a long way from the school. Dad says they get up at 6.30am. I have seen the sad sight of the  family's belongings, including the children's toys, piled high in their ex-home's front garden because there was no room for their belongings in the two hotel rooms they are allocated.

I have heard about a mother having to improvise cooking facilities in the bathroom of their bed and breakfast hotel so as to be able to feed their children.

There is absolutely no doubt that children are the most vulnerable casualties of the Coalition's war on the poor.  This is something that many teachers acknowledged when they spoke to me during the strike day. They see the children every day, they see the stress in the children's parents and hear from distressed children the possibility that they may be moved to Luton, Milton Keynes, Birmingham away from their friends and family - away from their support systems. In time these families will cost the state far more in treating the consequences of this ill treatment than it will have saved in cutting benefit.

The long term impact on the stability of the family and their mental and physical health is incalculable. The impact on children's life chances hardly bears thinking about.

Saturday's demonstration aims to give a voice to these children.  They will be encouraged to wear their school uniforms to highlight how the benefit cuts, council tax charges, bedroom tax etc are affecting school age children.

I have to attend another local event on that day but hope that this demonstration gets the support it deserves.

Why a retired headteacher and current governor supports today's teachers' strike

It is simple really: teachers have no choice but to strike if they are to stop education spiralling into a crisis that will damage thousands of children. A one day strike is inconvenient - Michael Gove and the Global Education Reform Movement is a catastrophe.

The DfE and Ofsted would have us believe that the quality of education our children receive is dependent on tough 'super' head teachers and their senior management teams following government diktat. It is not.

What is important is the quality of the teaching force, their creativity and their commitment. At a day to day level is is important that they should not be tired, frazzled, over-burdened with paperwork and fearful of the next monitoring visit.

Labour and now the Coalition have put the teaching force under incredible strain in terms of workload and have accompanied this by attacks on their professionalism and their conditions of service. Pensions have been cut and contributions increased, take home pay has declined 17% since 2010 and they are now expected to work until the age of 68.

Imagine for a moment  teaching a class of  lively 5 year olds as a 68 year old! The fact is that it will be a huge strain and  bad for teacher and child. Governors and parents must realise this is something they cannot countenance. Teachers will end up retiring early due to ill-health or will be subject to 'competency' procedures that will end their careers on a sad and sour note. 

Teachers are leaving the profession in increasing numbers with many young teachers giving up exhausted and frustrated after five years. Recruitment of headteachers is in crisis. Morale is plummeting.

The introduction of performance related pay will tie teachers ever closer to target driven lessons related to spurious data based on testing. 'Standards' may go up but in reality will reflect more 'teaching to the test'.

But worse is waiting in the wings. The employment of unqualified teachers by free schools and academies is a wedge that will be used to increase the employment of unqualified teachers in local authority schools faced by declining budgets. This deskilling and deprofessionalisation is no accident because corporations such as Murdoch (Gove's ex-employer) and Pearsons are on hand to supply schools with ipad based curriculum packages for individualised learning - much cheaper than teachers and supervised by low paid teaching assistants.

I respect teachers and have seen their commitment over the years and now in the schools where I am a governor. I am not surprised that the research shows that they work a 60 hour week to keep up with the planning and paperwork. I am impressed that despite this they find time to organise and supervise residential visits with children, organise sleepovers at the Science Museum, run afterschool clubs and fund raise at the School Fair.

Their commitment to children and their learning is immense but continually undermined by government interference and bullying and an inspection system that induces fear rather than positive partnership for improvement.

Support the teachers today for a better tomorrow for our children.

RECLAIM OUR SCHOOLS! Hammersmith.Tonight.

Tonight's Education Question Time at St Paul's Church in Hammersmith could be the start of a significant fightback against neoliberal policies in education. It is a chance to bring together teacher unions, parent groups, community organisations and governors in a concerted campaign to defend progressive child-centred and democratically accountable schools with broad educational aims from privatisation and narrow aims centred on international commercial competition.

Nothing could illustrate the current battle more than the fate of Sulivan Primary School, a walk away from tonight's venue. Hammersmith and Fulham Council has voted to close the successful Sulivan Primary School (ostensibly a merger with a nearby primary academy) and handing over its unique site to a boys' free school.

Staff, parents and pupils have all campaigned for their school and their views have been ignored.

Here are some of the questions tweeted for tonight. Add your own: #edqtime @nec2014