UPDATE: PROPOSED ‘FREE’ SCHOOL CALLED IN BY BRENT COUNCILLORS - BRENT NEU 'APPALLED BY PROPOSED PRIVATISATION'

From the Brent branch of the National Education Union (NEU)

UPDATE: The Call-In will be heard by the Scrutiny Committee on Thursday May 9th 

Brent NEU Officers have written in the strongest terms to Cllr Muhammed Butt, Leader of the Council, after the Labour Cabinet voted to support a ‘Free’ School on the Roundwood Youth Centre site. ‘Free’ schools are academies and part of this Government’s privatisation of state education programme.

Brent NEU had been repeatedly assured that there were no plans for any more ‘Free’ Schools. Cllr Butt had also publicly assured the local Labour Party of this when the idea was first mooted. Yet that is exactly what is happening – with Brent actually being the ‘sponsor’. It is to be run by Brent Special Academies Trust. 

Now the decision has been called in by a group of councillors led by Cllr Jumbo Chan stating that the Cabinet has not fully explored options for a Local Authority controlled school to provide alternative provision at the site of the Roundwood Centre or other potential school sites in the borough such as the Roe Green Strathcona site.

Brent NEU understands that local Headteachers are opposed to a ‘Free’ School, and that some of them had initially been approached to take on Roundwood as an extension of their own school. We have been told that these approaches had not been taken up. We have formally requested, under FoI, copies of any correspondence relating to this as we do not believe this was fully pursued by the Local Authority.

Brent NEU fully understand and support the need for more provision for students who are temporarily excluded from school, but strongly maintain that such provision should be under LA control and not as a ‘Free’ School run by a Labour council and an academy trust. 
It has been national Labour Party policy since last year not to support any new academies or ‘Free’ Schools and, when in power, to allow academies to return to the Local Authority. Jeremy Corbyn, Leader of the Labour Party, reinforced this message when he spoke to the NEU annual conference in Liverpool on 16^th April. A motion was also passed at the Brent 
Central Labour Party meeting on 18^tht April condemning this latest move by Brent Council. 

Hank Roberts, Brent NEU President and National Executive member said:

Has no-one at the top of the Council watched the Panorama programmes exposing the iniquitous practices of academies? I am sure they have, yet Cllr Butt and Cllr Sandra Kabir, who led the privatisation of The Village school, continue to support the privatisation of our schools supported by Gail Tolley, Strategic Director, Children and Young People. Instead they should follow the lead of other Labour Councils who are promoting the party line such as Newham, Barking and Dagenham, Camden and Redbridge to name but a few.

Editor’s Note: At the last Cabinet meeting when the free school proposal was approved local Labour Party member Graham Durham interrupted the proceedings to condemn the Labour Council’s move to invite potential sponsors to set up an alternative provision free school at the Roundwood Centre:

-->

Row looms over Brent Council's proposals for an 'Alternative Provision' free school

The proposal to set up a free school at the £5m Roundwood Centre has surfaced again to be discussed at the next meeting of the Cabinet.  This time it is called ‘Alternative Provision Free School with Integrated Youth Offer from the Roundwood Youth Centre’ shortened to Alternative Provision School.

I covered the proposal that followed Brent Council cutting youth provision even more severely in its proposed budget  than hitherto, leaving Roundwood free standing with few direct services. Roundwood Centre’s funding source via the Big Lottery MyPlace scheme meant that it could not be closed by Brent Council without penalty.

On January 17^th I drew attention to the proposal for a free school/academy on the site LINK:

In addition the council proposes that a PRU (Pupil Referral Unit) be set up in the Centre. This would provide for pupils temporarily excluded from school. It would be classified as a new school and as such would have to be a free school or part of a multi-academy trust. It is proposed that it be run by Brent Special Academies Trust (currently consisting of Manor and the Avenue special schools).

Given Labour’s policy of not creating any new free schools and academies this is controversial within the local Labour Party. This is not only about the issue of lack of public democratic accountability of academies but also the very ad hoc way special needs provision is being developed in Brent and the backdoor privatisation of most of the borough’s non-mainstream special needs provision. A practical issue is whether the BSAT has any relevant experience in running a PRU -  a different kettle of fish from managing special schools.

The Budget Scrutiny Task Force recognised this dilemma stating:

It is far from ideal in our opinion, that this new school would be a free school, but unfortunately the law ensures that new schools opening are always outside of local education authority control. Perhaps a change of central government policy [a Corbyn government?] in future may allow the school to one day become part of the Brent family.

The arrangement is also not perfect for Brent because the asset would transfer to Brent Academies Trust meaning any additional income they derive from hiring out other rooms on site would not be retained by the council, However we will retain some oversite (sic) of the organisations as a senior officer will sit on the Trust’s board.

Later on the evening that this post was published Brent Counci leader Muhammed Butt was asked about it at a Brent Labour Party meeting and I published a follow up on Saturday January 19^th LINK:

According to several sources at the Labour Party meeting on Thursday evening Cllr Muhammed Butt said that the PRU (Alternative Provision) would be run by the Local Authority and was not suitable for a school.  He then muddied the waters by vaguely commenting that the authority was part of a consortium looking to set up a free school.

I sought clarification from Muhammed Butt asking:

I’ve heard that you told LP meeting last night that PRU at Roundwood Centre will be run by the LA and not a MAT. Is that correct? If so does Roundwood remain the property of Brent Council? I’d like to put the record straight if the Budget Scrutiny Report was wrong.

Butt replied, somewhat unhelpfully, that he never discussed Labour Party matters externally.

I also asked Brent Council Press Office for a comment but they did not respond.

The proposal now is not that the Brent Special Academies Trust runs the free school/Pupil Referral Unit but that Brent Council seeks a sponsor via the ‘Free School Presumption route.’:

The Free School presumption route whereby the council would advertise a proposal to establish a new school and invite DfE approved academy sponsors to apply to run the school. The council is responsible for providing a site and buildings.

The Secretary of State would make the final decision on a sponsor.

The Council often refers to the Brent ‘family of schools’ to include local authority schools,  academies and free schools, but only local authority schools are under direct Brent Council oversight and democratic accountability and funded via the Council’s distribution of the Direct Schools Grant . Academies and free schools are directly funded by the government.

The Cabinet report notes:

Once open the council would commission places from the Alternative Provision School, funded from the High Needs block of the Dedicated Schools Grant (DSG). Currently, the council commissions alternative provision places from within the borough at Brent River College and from external providers. The Alternative Provision School would allow an increased proportion of pupils to be placed in Brent. The procurement process should therefore consider the rates the provider would charge the council and secondary schools for commissioning places, as this will have an impact on the DSG, and there is potential to achieve better value for money for High Needs Block.

-->

On the Budget Scrutiny’s concern over the transfer of the asset the Cabinet report states:

The intention is for one single overall provider working with relevant partners to deliver the Alternative Provision School combined with the integrated youth/community offer. The Council would retain the freehold for Roundwood Youth Centre but the deed of designation would transfer to the new provider, who would take on responsibility for maintenance of the building.

Clearly the ‘deed of designation’ needs careful scrutiny if Brent is not to lose another of its assets, albeit one protected by MyPlace restrictions. The association of the proposal with budget cuts is made clear in the Financial Implications section of the Cabinet Report:

The budget for the Roundwood Centre and the associated MyPlace budget totalled £360k before a reduction of £250k is applied, as per the youth service saving (ref no. CYP005) approved as part of the 2019/20 budget setting process in February 2019. The saving to the General Fund is to be achieved by ending Council run and directly funded youth services from the site creating savings on premises costs, and creating a different model of community and voluntary provision. This model would come into effect when the Alternative Provision School plans to open in January 2020, so the running costs of the Roundwood centre and cost of any operational activity up until this date would need to be 
contained within the residual £110k budget, or alternative in-year savings would need to be found across the Inclusion service.

It is proposed that the Alternative Provision School would be based at the Roundwood Centre. As mentioned in paragraph 5.1, the Roundwood Centre is subject to a Big Lottery Fund MyPlace grant agreement which is protected by a restriction on the council title at the Land Registry and therefore the form of lease would be subject to the approval of the Education and Skills Funding Agency and the Department for Culture, Media and Sport. 


The Council claim that they have sought and received agreement in principle from the DCMS for the proposed use of this MyPlace funded site. 

Following on from the controversy over the  Village School academisation and the suggestion from Labour Party members  that Brent Council, and especially its leader Muhammed Butt, were not following Labour Party policy on academies and free schools, this proposal is likely to be seen as another move to privatise education.  Following on from the almost total (apart from The Phoenix) academisation of SEND education, provision for vulnerable pupils is also being removed from Brent Council responsibility and accountability.

The Cabinet report gives a long list of consultations but nowhere is there a report on the outcome of the consultations. We are expected to presume that that the consultees were in favour. I have submitted an FoI request asking for any reports/minutes on the outcome of the consultations. LINK

Brent Council fights the cuts via a letter to government ministers

There has been a bit of a battle going on in the Labour Party with activists concerned that Brent Council leader Muhammed Butt, hadn't signed one of several statements/declarations on local government cuts. He appeared to be backing the most mild statement which amounted to little more than a quiet quibble.

Now a motion on the 'Breaking Point' campaign over cuts has been tabled for Monday's Full Council Meeting.  Rather than mounting a militant campaign, going out to the community and building mass support amongst those most affected by the cuts, they are going to send a letter to the government...

Even headteachers furious at school cuts managed to march on Downing Street.

We have Climate Extinction - how about Local Government Extinction?

Breaking Point

Full Council – 26 November 2018 Motion selected by the Labour Group

This Council notes that many council budgets are now at Breaking Point. Austerity has caused huge damage to communities up and down the UK, with devastating effects on key public services that protect the most defenceless in society – children at risk, disabled adults and vulnerable older people – and the services we all rely on, like clean streets, libraries, and the teachers in our schools.

•   Government cuts mean that Brent has £177m less to invest in essential and much loved public services than under the last Labour government in 2010; 


•   With an aging population and growing demand adult social care faces a gap of £3.5 billion – with only 14% of council staff now confident that vulnerable local residents are safe and cared for; 


•   Government cuts have seen local authorities left with impossible choices, and 80% of council staff now say they have no confidence in the future of local services; 


•   Brent schools will have lost out on more than £6k per pupil over the last decade, equating to a loss of an entire academic year’s funding; 


•   Northamptonshire has already gone bust due to Tory incompetence at both national and local level, and more councils are predicted to collapse without immediate emergency funding; 


•   Councils now face a further funding gap of £7.8 billion by 2025 just to keep services ‘standing still’ and meeting additional demand. Even Lord Gary Porter, the Conservative Chair of the Local Government Association, has said ‘Councils can no longer be expected to run our vital local services on a shoestring’. 
This Council condemns Chief Secretary to the Treasury Liz Truss MP for stating on BBC Newsnight on 1st October 2018 that the government is “not making cuts to local authorities”, when all independent assessments of government spending show that this is entirely false; and that this Council further notes that Prime Minister Theresa May has also claimed that “austerity is over” despite planning a further £1.3bn of cuts to council budgets over the next year. 


 This Council agrees with the aims of the ‘Breaking Point’ petition signed by Brent Labour councillors, in calling for the Prime Minister and Chancellor to truly end austerity in Local Government by: 


•   Using the Budget to reverse next years planned £1.3bn cut to council budgets; and 


•   Pledging to use the Spending Review to restore council funding to 2010 levels over the next 
four years. 
This Council resolves to: 


Support the ‘Breaking Point’ campaign, recognising the devastating impact that austerity has had on our local community.

 

 Ask the Leader of the Council to write to the Chancellor of the Exchequer and the Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government setting out the funding pressures faced by Brent Council, and calling on the Government to truly end austerity in Local Government.

Cllr Butt's bad news week as he is accused of 'social cleansing' and Brent Central CLP swings left

Kilburn Times October 18th

With Cllr Abdirazak Abdi proving to be as courageous at revealing the short-comings of Brent Council as his Kilburn ward predecessor Cllr Duffy and Brent Central Constituency Labour Party swinging to the left, this has not been a good week for Muhammed Butt, leader of Brent Council.

The Kilburn Times LINK followed up my story of a week ago  LINK about South Kilburn residents being faced with eviction by the council, without their councillors being informed of a crucial  meeting about the issue. Cllr Abdi minced no words when he accused the Labour council of social cleansing.

Abdi is strongly backed by Kilburn Labour Party which is still campaigning over his removal from the Planning Committee by Cllr Butt. Now the Brent Central Labour Party looks as if it too will be a thorn in Butt's side with the left winning all but one officer position in the CLP  LINK.  Significantly the left filled all 10 places on the Local Campaigns Forum (LCF) which organises councillor selections and election campaigns.  The CLP also nominated at 6 left slate candidates for the National Constitutional Committee elections.

The LCF result may be most significant in the long run as it sets priorities for campaigns over the coming period when Butt and his cabinet are putting forward a cuts budget LINK and continuing the council's unhealthy close relationship with developers.

Cllr Butt has been criticised for not doing more to fight the local government cuts and for not signing a key letter protesting against the cuts signed by other council leaders. However, he turned up this week at the Local Government's Association lobby of Downing Street over funding and managed a photo opportunity with Nick Forbes leader of Newcastle Council and the LGA Labour Group.

It will take more than the odd photo opportunity to persuade Butt's critics that he is responding to their concerns.

Hitherto, opposition to Cllr Butt's leadership has been more about his personal leadership style and controlling approach rather than policies. The relationship between Brent Council Labour Group and the three local CLPs (Hampstead & Kilburn, Brent Central and Brent North) in terms of the latters' ability to influence specific policy is ill-defined and the Council leadership have been able to shrug off or ignore critical motions.

The LCF may now become the forum for a battle over the future political direction of the council.

Labour adopts Green Party policy on academies but there is more to be done

There was a welcome move at the Labour Party Conference towards the Green Party’s long-standing policy of opposition to academies and free schools and a commitment to reintegrating existing ones in the local authority school system. There is still a long way to go including the abolition of the SATs tests that narrow the school curriculum and stress both children and school staff unnecessarily, and the scrapping of Ofsted and its replacement by a peer-based method of school improvement such as that pioneered by the London Challenge and provided by Challenge Partners.

Unfortunately the change in Labour Party policy came after an article I had written for Green Left’s Autumn Conference Water Melon had gone to the printers. 

However, I think the following passage though is still relevant:

The concept of a National Education Service is relatively vague and still being worked on by the Labour Party.  At its worst it could be top-down, restrictive and bureaucratic at its best it could set up an entitlement framework across all sectors. 

Both Labour and Greens have to face the problem of the decline of local government both in terms of finances and democratic structures. The Cabinet system has meant very little open debate about local schools, which used to take place in Education Committees and scrutiny is often poor. Alongside this is a lack of public involvement with poor election turnout.

How will national government, local government and governing bodies interact in the future and how can democratic accountability be enhanced?

This is the statement issued by the Anti Academies Alliance:

Angela Rayner’s bold speech has put an end to the era of ‘cross party consensus’ on academisation that has dominated the education policy of the main parties for over a decade. In a move that will send shock waves through the board rooms of MATs and academy chains, there is now a realistic chance that the whole privatisation bandwagon will be halted.

Rayner’s speech to the Labour Party conference highlighted many of the problems and gave a glimpse of solutions through creating a democratic and locally accountable National Education Service. She tore into ‘fat cat’ pay and obscene profiteering. She put the needs of children and their families back centre stage of the debate. It was a genuinely refreshing vision. At last a politician has stepped outside the Westminster bubble and started listening.

Some may worry that there is insufficient detail as yet, but a new direction of travel has been set. Our job is to work together to help build this vision of a National Education Service, to help solve the detailed problems of “de-academisation” and to help carry the news of this important change into every school community.

That means challenging every academisation proposal. No school should academise this side of the next general election. It would be a costly, reckless and probably futile decision. The process consumes resources that would be better spent on ameliorating the effects of cuts to school budgets. Governors should refocus on real school improvement and local councils should scrutinise all plans for academisation and propose alternatives.

But it is also time for some introspection from the fat cat CEOs. The writing is on the wall. The least they could do is acknowledge how inappropriately they have been rewarded and offer serious pay restraint. But the likes of Sir Dan Moynihan, Sir Steve Lancashire and other fat cat CEOs should get out of education altogether. Their model of leadership has corrupted public services values in education. We need leaders in our school system who are committed to a National Education Service, who welcome local democratic accountability and who refuse to line their own pockets with exorbitant salaries. We need education for the many not the few.

Statement of Interest: I am a member of the Steering Group of the Anti Academies Alliance and a member of the National Education Union

Brent Momentum backs lobby of Labour NEC on IHRA

Brent Momentum is supporting the lobby of the Labour NEC today urging it not to adopt the full IHRA definition of anti-Semitism and its examples. The lobbying initiative was agreed at an emergency meeting organised by  Camden Momentum attended by more than a 100 people who were members of 17 Momentum groups.

No to IHRA, Yes to BDS

ALL WELCOME TO JOIN THE MASS LOBBY OF LABOUR’S NEC
 where the IHRA definition of antisemitism and its examples will be discussed

from 9am, Tuesday, 4 September, 105 Victoria St, London SW1E 6QT

Camden Momentum has launched a petition calling for a vote of all Labour Party members on the issue.

IHRA: We the members must decide not the Israel lobby

SIGN THE PETITION

WE DEMAND
The members elected Jeremy Corbyn. The IHRA definition would return the party to the right which we voted down by a large majority – twice. Therefore, the members, not the NEC, nor the PLP, must decide whether or not to adopt the IHRA examples. We demand that the decision be put to a vote of all Labour Party members. 

Background
This petition was agreed overwhelmingly on 20 August 2018 at an emergency meeting called by Camden Momentum and attended by over 110 members from 16 Momentum groups. Please sign and circulate widely.

We, members of the LP, elected Jeremy Corbyn leader because he is a socialist, an antiracist and stands for an ethical foreign policy based on human rights, including the rights of Palestinians living under Israeli apartheid.

Corbyn has been under mounting pressure from right-wing Labour MPs, Zionist organisations and the mainstream media determined to remove our elected leader, to adopt all the examples in the IHRA definition. The heads of Momentum and some unions, without consulting their members, have also accepted this. 

Palestinians, other people of colour and other antiracists, including Jewish people who oppose Israeli apartheid, have said that the IHRA examples would censor Palestinians’ right to self-determination, criminalise the BDS movement and pose an existential threat to free speech on Israel.

In March 2018, a poll of Labour Party members found that 77% believe the charges of antisemitism in the Labour Party are ‘being deliberately exaggerated to damage Labour and Jeremy Corbyn, or to stifle criticism of Israel’.

Three pro-Israel newspapers, The Jewish Chronicle, the Jewish Telegraph and Jewish News, accuse Labour under Corbyn of ‘political antisemitism’ because it criticises Israel, the Jewish State. The three papers say, ‘Had the full IHRA definition with examples relating to Israel been approved, hundreds, if not thousands, of Labour and Momentum members would need to be expelled.’ This presumes that the LP must be purged of its Palestinian and pro-Palestinian members, including Jewish ones, and that the IHRA definition is a means to this end. Many Corbyn supporters have already been expelled, suspended or blocked from standing for office, and some have resigned.

The extreme right is on the ascendant in the Tory party, in Trump’s US, in Netanyahu’s Israel with the recent killing and maiming of unarmed Palestinian protesters and a new law institutionalising apartheid, and in Europe with a number of anti-immigrant, Islamophobic and antisemitic governments. Only a socialist Corbyn government and the movement it represents can stop the extreme right in the UK.

Momentum Camden

Jewish Voice for Labour have submitted a paper to the Labour Party Consultation on the definition of anti-Semitism HERE