Supreme Court rules UK failing to protect people from air pollution

The Supreme Court has declared that the UK Government is failing to protect people from dangerous levels of air pollution. This decision paves the way for the European Commission to take legal action against the UK.

Air pollution causes 4,000 early deaths each year in London alone and poses a particular danger to children and those with existing health conditions.

The court case, brought by environmental lawyers at Client Earth, concerns 16 cities and regions which government plans show will suffer from illegal levels of nitrogen dioxide, a toxic gas - until as late as 2020 or 2025.

The Supreme Court confirmed that because the Government is in breach of the EU Air Quality Directive “the way is open to immediate enforcement action at national or European level”. However, before deciding whether to take further action to enforce the law, it has referred a number of legal questions to the Court of Justice of the European Union.

 Jean Lambert, Green Party Member of the European Parliament  for London and an honorary founder member of Clean Air London said:

This ruling confirms what many of us have been saying for a long time:The UK Government must do more to protect the population from harmful levels of air pollution.

For too long we’ve seen action on air pollution happening at a snail’space. The government must take heed of this ruling and get to work on drastically reducing the levels of pollution in our towns and cities.

James Thornton, ClientEarth CEO, said 

This historic ruling marks a turning point in the fight for clean air and will pile the pressure on Owen Paterson. Faced with court action on two fronts, he must now come up with an ambitious plan to protect people from carcinogenic diesel fumes. Until now, his only policy has been lobbying in Europe to try and weaken air pollution laws.

The Supreme Court recognised that this case has broader implications for EU environmental law: The Government can’t flout environmental law with impunity. If the Government breaks the law, citizens can demand justice and the courts must act.”

Michaela Free School bid foundering?

Last week Brent officials met with proponents of the Michaela Free School about their bid to open a four form entry secondary school at Arena House, the old College of North West London building opposite Wembley Park station.

Although Katharine Birbalsingh, infamous for her intervention at the Tory Party Conference, and her disciples were keen to assure Brent Council that they could comply with all the criteria for free school partnerships set out by the council (see below) there were doubts that they were compatible with the school's aims as set out on its website.

Additionally there are doubts about how many local parents have actually signed up to say that they are interested in sending the children to Michaela, especially as only eight people in total turned up to their consultation - very few, if any, of whom were parents of prospective students.

Well informed sources also say that the building itself is in poor condition and has an asbestos problem.

The Council's criteria for partnership are:

Academies and free school providers working with the Council will be expected to demonstrate:

1. An absolute commitment to the ethos and values of inclusive education for all Brent’s children and recognition of the positive role schools should play in the wider community.

2. A commitment to a close working relationship with the local authority in order to maintain an appropriate focus on borough-wide priorities, including local authority nomination of a member of the governing body and a commitment to sharing performance information.

3. The ability to deliver school improvement in an urban context.

4. That the establishment of the proposed education provision would be supported by demonstrable parental demand and with a genuine commitment to providing school places for local children.

5. Appropriate staffing arrangements to ensure high quality teaching and learning from qualified staff and good employment practices, including in relation to support and contracted staff.

6. A commitment to meeting the needs of Brent’s diverse community.

7. A commitment to ensuring the future employability of young people (in particular in secondary and 16 to 19) through links with business, industry and higher education.

8. A commitment to community access and use of facilities through agreed extended opening and lettings policy.

9. A commitment to good pupil nutrition and healthy eating.

10. A commitment to inclusive practice and fair access to the school for all pupils as governed by the Admission Code of Practice and the Authority’s Fair Access Protocols.

Petition to change law on leafleting for small scale events

Guest blog from Manifesto Club

Under the Clean Neighbourhoods and Environment Act 2005, councils can designate areas within which people must buy a licence to hand out leaflets. Nearly a third of councils now restrict leafleting, and licences are prohibitively expensive.

These rules have been catastrophic for theatres, village halls, comedy clubs and small nightclubs, which rely on leafleting, but cannot afford such fees.

A flyer ban in Leicester Square caused the collapse of several comedy nights. One Women’s Institute was threatened with a fine for handing out leaflets about its art exhibition. Oxford student societies were asked to pay £100 a month for leafleting.

Leafleting is a key civic freedom, with a long tradition in this country, and should not be restricted without good reason. Litter can be dealt with through the proper provision of litter bins and other common-sense measures, rather than restrictions on people’s rights to use public space.

The 2005 Act already provides exemption for political and religious leafleting, or leafleting on behalf of a charity. The Government should amend the Act, to provide an additional exemption for leafleting for small-scale cultural and community events. 

Lord Clement Jones is introducing a private members' bill in early May which would exempt small-scale local events from the need to buy leafleting licenses. The Manifesto Club has a petition to support a change in the law on leafleting HERE

Call for DfE to recognise Gladstone Park's progress without forced academisation

The Parents' Action Group at Gladstone Park Primary School have issued the following encouraging statement:

Despite improving children’s performance by significantly more than the national average, Gladstone Park Primary School in Dollis Hill, North-West London was rated “inadequate” by an Ofsted inspection in November 2012. This was based on progress in Years 3 to 5 being classed as too slow.

However, results for the Autumn and Spring 2012/13 terms now show that progress across Key Stage 2 year groups (Years 3 to 6) is well above expectations.

Using the standard Average Point Score measure, Key Stage 2 children are expected to progress by 1 point per term on average in reading, writing and maths. Over the Autumn and Spring Terms, where 2 points progress for each year group would be expected, the overall average figures for Gladstone Park Primary School are:

Year Three: 2.0 points
Year Four: 2.7 points
Year Five: 3.4 points
Year Six: 4.8 points

If, as anticipated, this trend continues through the Summer Term, it will make Gladstone Park Primary School one of the best performing in the country in terms of value added (progress against expectations). This is thanks to the school’s own improvement plan, with the support of the Local Education Authority and other local community schools, and the energy and commitment of the teachers.

Yet despite these results, the Department for Education (DfE) is still trying to force Gladstone Park Primary School to become an academy, over the objections of parents, governors and staff. The DfE says that it will select an academy sponsor and impose it on the school, and only then consult with the parents over what is effectively a done deal.

However, such a change would be highly disruptive, and threatens to undo all the good work done so far.

Mike Baker who has a child in reception said:

The DfE should recognise the excellent progress made by the school under its existing governance arrangements, and end the uncertainty over its future by withdrawing the threat to forced academisation. This is in the interests of our children’s education, which should surely be everyone’s paramount concern.

Brent Labour elections update

Islington Council leader Catherine West appears to have ditched her possible bid for the Labour Brent Central nomination following reports that she is setting her sights on the Hornsey and Wood Green seat currently held by Lib Dem Lynne Featherstone.

Meanwhile senior Brent Labour sources have bigged up Regent's Park councillor Tulip Suddiq's chances in Hampstead and Kilburn although veteran left-winger Graham Durham immediately commented, 'We don't want another Blairite, we have enough in the PLP already.' The Labour Party source suggested that Sophie Linden, a former special adviser to David Blunkett had no base in Brent and that Fiona Millar had withdrawn when soundings indicated she had little support.

The only new candidate to come forward for a Council Executive position is Cllr Aslam Choudry who will fight Cllr Willehema Mitchell-Murry for Crime and Public Safety.

Other contests so far are:

Children and Families: Michael Pavey vs Mary Arnold
Environment and Neighbourhoods: Roxanne Mashari vs James Powney
Customers and Citizens: James Denselow vs Lesley Jones

There is still time for others to come forward as the hustings are not until May 9th and the Annual General Meeting, where the voting takes place, is on May 11th.

Millar's withdrawal from Hampstead and Kilburn highlights Labour's failures on education

The announcement yesterday that Labour education activist Fiona Millar has withdrawn from the contest to represent Hampstead and Kilburn is a clear sign of the frustration that many party members, teachers and parents feel about Stephen Twigg's failure as Michael Gove's shadow.


Twigg's failure to take Gove on regarding examination reform, free schools, forced academies and the curriculum have led to him being given the hashtag #silenttwigg and facebook commentary on Silent Twigg focus on his latest non-pronoucements as open goals loom before him..

Millar herself is quoted in the Standard as saying:

It is very important that Michael Gove and his policies are challenged vigorously. At the moment that is probably easier to do from outside the party machine and is what I will continue doing.

She went on to say that Labour policy on education 'is too vague at the moment'.

Fiona Millar, along with Melissa Benn and Francis Gilbert are part of the Local Schools Network LINK

Their core message is:

1. Every child has a right to go to an excellent local state school, enabling every child to achieve their full potential.
2. Every state school should have a fair admissions procedure.
3. Every local school should be responsive to their parents and pupils’ needs and wishes and be accountable to the local community.
4. That local schools in difficulties should be supported to improve, not attacked and  demoralised.

Salusbury Academy Federation split?

Unconfirmed reports are reaching me that the Park Federation Academy Trust LINK  have pulled out of the federation arrangement with Salusbury Primary School.

The split is alleged to have happened as a result of Salusbury staff being unhappy about the possible imposition of a headteacher by the Park Federation's Chief Executive.

The federation is made up of two large primary schools in Hayes, Cranford Park and Wood End Park. Its website currently carries no mention of Salusbury Primary. Park's Chief Executive is Dr Martin Young.

Salusbury governors decided to join  the federation following pressure from the DfE  to become a forced academy as a result of a critical Ofsted report. Gladstone Park Primary parents are fighting the imposition of academy status after the school was given Grade 4 by Ofsted despite previously being Grade 2 and having above average SAT results at Key Stage 1 and Key Stage 2.

Survey reveals gap between teachers' beliefs and government diktat

A newly released survey of early years and primary professionals, released at the launch summit of the Save Childhood Movement on the 27th and 28th of April and prepared in partnership with the Barrett Values Centre, has revealed an enormous disparity between the values that teachers feel are important for the education system and what is actually going on.

- While 67% of those surveyed thought that education should be child-centred as a matter of priority, only 2% thought the current system fulfilled that.

- While 60% of respondents thought creativity should be prioritised, less than 2% thought the current system supported it.

- And while 50% believed that early education should emphasise the importance of play, only 2% thought the current system did that.

- Only 2% of respondents thought that the current system cultivated a passion for learning, and 0% believed that it fostered empowerment.

When asked which words best described the current state of British education as they experienced it, the most common words were: 

focus on targets, bureaucracy, results focus, top-down pressure and adult agenda.

In contrast, when asked which words they believed should characterise education the words most commonly chosen were:

child-centred, creativity, importance of play, passion for learning and empowerment.

The gap between the values held by the practitioners themselves and those of the education system as a whole revealed a level of 'Cultural Entropy' (meaning the degree of dysfunctional or fear-driven behaviour) that the Barrett Values Centre terms "a critical situation requiring leadership changes to avoid organisational

 failure'.

The survey examined the values of 177 early years professionals including childminders, nursery and primary school teachers and headteachers, school governors, lecturers and academics and was conducted between the 10th and the 17 of April, 2013.

Wendy Ellyatt, Founding Director and CEO of the movement, shared her own deep concern about the current situation -

" It is simply unacceptable that there should be such a disparity between the values that teachers themselves hold and the systems that we are then asking them to work within. How we can expect them to be the creative, spontaneous, passionate and empowered adults that we really need around children when they are empowerment, constantly ground down by the demands of the system? We need something better and the movement is determined to help fight for this."

The movement hopes to soon extend this survey to include a much more significant percentage of the teaching profession.