Away from the trendy bars, skateboarders and joggers of Brighton the World at One finds out about the success of the Green Party in industrial West Midlands:
WEMBLEY MATTERS News and views on local politics, the environment, climate change, culture and local history
Tuesday, 17 September 2013
Support the redoubtable Kensal Rise Library campaigners tomorrow
The Friends of Kensal Rise Library will be represented at
the Brent Council Planning Committee on Wednesday 18th September by Co-Chair David Butcher. There will be other speakers
including two from local resident’s associations and whoever has
requested permission to speak and also the developer or his agent.
At this meeting the Planning Committee, which is made up of councillors, will decide whether or not to accept the recommendation of the Chief Planning Officer to refuse planning permission for the proposal for the library by Mr Andrew Gillick of Kensal Properties Ltd. The Friends would like to see as many people as possible at this meeting as it is important to show how this community feels about the proposed development.
- See more at: http://www.savekensalriselibrary.org/news/#sthash.e1suynlr.dpuf
Planning Committee Meeting Wednesday 18th September at 7pm at the Civic Centre, Engineers Way, Wembley. Wembley Park tube, Olympic Way and then right just before the stadium. 206 bus.
At this meeting the Planning Committee, which is made up of councillors, will decide whether or not to accept the recommendation of the Chief Planning Officer to refuse planning permission for the proposal for the library by Mr Andrew Gillick of Kensal Properties Ltd. The Friends would like to see as many people as possible at this meeting as it is important to show how this community feels about the proposed development.
- See more at: http://www.savekensalriselibrary.org/news/#sthash.e1suynlr.dpuf
Planning Committee Meeting Wednesday 18th September at 7pm at the Civic Centre, Engineers Way, Wembley. Wembley Park tube, Olympic Way and then right just before the stadium. 206 bus.
Councils need powers to build new schools - new campaign needs your support
At present Coalition policy under Michael Gove restricts any new schools to academies or free schools outside the control of local authorities. In a posting on this two weeks ago I said LINK
Local authorities have the local knowledge to plan new schools where they are most needed and the expertise and resources to ensure that such schools are fit for purpose, have access to school support services and are professionally staffed so that they hit the ground running. Free schools, even if they happen to be provided in areas of shortage (and many are not), do not have these guarantees.
Local authorities have a statutory duty to provide education and parents have a legal duty to ensure that their children attend school. Gove's policy, despite all his protestations, is actually thwarting both, and in the process damaging children.
At present in Brent we lack -3.2% of school places which will become -10.3% by 2016-17.
The Campaign says:
The way school places are organised changed dramatically when the Academies Act gained Royal Assent in 2010. Up until this point local authorities played a pivotal role in planning for, commissioning and providing high quality places for pupils across the country. This is no longer the case.
Local authorities have lost the power to open new schools and their budgets have been slashed. A Free School can now be set up anywhere at the whim of the Secretary of State for Education, Michael Gove. The problem with this is that it doesn't take into account local need or demand, or even the potential surplus of school places in any given area.
And that's why the UK is now facing a shortfall in quality school places. In London, this could be up to 23% by 2016.
Sounds scary? It is. But the solution is beautifully simple:
GIVE THE POWER TO COMMISSION AND BUILD SCHOOLS BACK TO LOCAL AUTHORITIES
The Government must ensure that any extra places provided are quality places. All children deserve to be taught by a qualified teacher. They also deserve to be taught in an appropriate environment – it would be wrong to cram more children into already crowded classrooms.The site has a link for you to write to your MP and to sign a petition. If we want to secure quality, planned and democratically controlled education for our children we should support this campaign.
The local authority still has a responsibility for education for all local children, but they cannot guarantee high quality school places without the ability to plan for the future, build schools or reduce school size where needed. Can you contact your MP to let them know your concerns?
Twitter link @placescrisis Website: http://www.theschoolplacescrisis.com/
Monday, 16 September 2013
Brent Council to rely on volunteers for Meals on Wheels provision
Brent Executive approved the handing over of the provision of Meals on Wheels and meals at Day Care Centres to the voluntary sector this evening. There were passionate speeches by Brent Fightback and Labour Party members Michael Calderbank and Graham Durham expressing concern over the proposals and posing some incisive questions. Their speeches caused Cllr Pavey to hesitate saying they had raised legitimate concerns and Cllr Denselow said that he could see the concern, in an era of cuts, over a Big Society style solution, but he preferred to see it as a cooperative solution offering vulnerable people choice and control.
Calderbank expressed concern over redundancies at the current provider, payments to be made to new providers, whether the voluntary organisations would be paid the London Living Wage that the Council had committed itself to, the report's 'high risk' with 'medium' probability assessment that vulnerable people may go without a meal with a number of different voluntary sector providers.
Stressing he was not opposed to voluntary organisations providing services, but that this should not be a cover for cuts, or at the cost of a reduction in quality, he asked about monitoring of quality and hygiene standards, and wanted confirmation that the new service would not longer provide puddings.
Calderbank said he couldn't believe that the Council was going ahead on the basis of such a small pilot project with one provider. This was not a strong basis for a major change. He asked what sanctions would be applied to providers who dropped out.
Durham said that he has spoken to the minister at Harlesden Methodist Church which had operated the pilot and found that the only person to be employed was a 0.7 cook, all the rest delivering the service would be volunteers. This was not a partnership with the voluntary sector but reliance on unpaid volunteers. The Council was creating no jobs and guilty of creating unemployment when it was already at 8.4%
Through the NHS Patients group he had heard complaints about food being undercooked, the lack of puddings and food put into one container like baby food.
He said with disparate providers there was a need for strong contract compliance to ensure continuity of quality of food and reliability of delivery. The real motive seemed to be the £300,000 of 'savings' - where was the Council's much vaunted London Living Wage?
Phil Porter, Acting Director of Adult Social Services, responded rather than Cllr Krupesh Hirani, lead member for Adult Social Care, who was absent from the Executive Meeting. Porter said the changes had been drivem by better service and increasing cost and control, not by cuts. The previous provider had provided only one option from their base in Leicester. The new range of suppliers would give more choice. The Council had been honest in publishing negative comments from service users but the 8 in the pilot had been 'very happy. (In fact the pilot numbers were reduced to six with one dissatisfied and seeking alternatives and 'very happy' doesn't really describe some of the other users' comments),
He said there would be no change of service for vulnerable individuals without a review of their needs carried out by social workers to understand their capacity and support network- managing risk was part of the review.
There was no contract compliance because the Council had a new role facilitating the market rather than establishing a contractual relationship. This was part of a broader move which the Council was undertaking. It created a challenge and removed the comfort blanket of a single provider.
Porter said the Council couldn't make the providers commit to the London Living Wage - they could only encourage them t pay it. It was fundamental to give power to the provider and all the support required to make sure the provision is also safe, The scheme would deliver savings and a better service.
He said 5 or 6* people employed by Apetito in Brent would be affected by redundancy. He could make no undertaking that jobs would be created because some providers would be able to provide within their existing infrastructure and others may not.
Cllr Roxanne Mashari intervened to say that she had been concerned about nutritional standards being maintained in the new arrangements and had visited Cricklewood Homeless Concern to see their provision. As a result she thought it was a fantastic move and should have been made earlier. The food was fresh meat and fish, fruits such as avocado, not baby food, and was served in ceramic type containers. Cricklewood Homeless Concern were able to build on their existing relationships with their clients.
To protests from the audience that their questions had not all been answered, the Executive went on to approve the new arrangements.
* Please note earlier version because of a typographical error rendered this figure as 506. My apologies.
Calderbank expressed concern over redundancies at the current provider, payments to be made to new providers, whether the voluntary organisations would be paid the London Living Wage that the Council had committed itself to, the report's 'high risk' with 'medium' probability assessment that vulnerable people may go without a meal with a number of different voluntary sector providers.
Stressing he was not opposed to voluntary organisations providing services, but that this should not be a cover for cuts, or at the cost of a reduction in quality, he asked about monitoring of quality and hygiene standards, and wanted confirmation that the new service would not longer provide puddings.
Calderbank said he couldn't believe that the Council was going ahead on the basis of such a small pilot project with one provider. This was not a strong basis for a major change. He asked what sanctions would be applied to providers who dropped out.
Durham said that he has spoken to the minister at Harlesden Methodist Church which had operated the pilot and found that the only person to be employed was a 0.7 cook, all the rest delivering the service would be volunteers. This was not a partnership with the voluntary sector but reliance on unpaid volunteers. The Council was creating no jobs and guilty of creating unemployment when it was already at 8.4%
Through the NHS Patients group he had heard complaints about food being undercooked, the lack of puddings and food put into one container like baby food.
He said with disparate providers there was a need for strong contract compliance to ensure continuity of quality of food and reliability of delivery. The real motive seemed to be the £300,000 of 'savings' - where was the Council's much vaunted London Living Wage?
Phil Porter, Acting Director of Adult Social Services, responded rather than Cllr Krupesh Hirani, lead member for Adult Social Care, who was absent from the Executive Meeting. Porter said the changes had been drivem by better service and increasing cost and control, not by cuts. The previous provider had provided only one option from their base in Leicester. The new range of suppliers would give more choice. The Council had been honest in publishing negative comments from service users but the 8 in the pilot had been 'very happy. (In fact the pilot numbers were reduced to six with one dissatisfied and seeking alternatives and 'very happy' doesn't really describe some of the other users' comments),
He said there would be no change of service for vulnerable individuals without a review of their needs carried out by social workers to understand their capacity and support network- managing risk was part of the review.
There was no contract compliance because the Council had a new role facilitating the market rather than establishing a contractual relationship. This was part of a broader move which the Council was undertaking. It created a challenge and removed the comfort blanket of a single provider.
Porter said the Council couldn't make the providers commit to the London Living Wage - they could only encourage them t pay it. It was fundamental to give power to the provider and all the support required to make sure the provision is also safe, The scheme would deliver savings and a better service.
He said 5 or 6* people employed by Apetito in Brent would be affected by redundancy. He could make no undertaking that jobs would be created because some providers would be able to provide within their existing infrastructure and others may not.
Cllr Roxanne Mashari intervened to say that she had been concerned about nutritional standards being maintained in the new arrangements and had visited Cricklewood Homeless Concern to see their provision. As a result she thought it was a fantastic move and should have been made earlier. The food was fresh meat and fish, fruits such as avocado, not baby food, and was served in ceramic type containers. Cricklewood Homeless Concern were able to build on their existing relationships with their clients.
To protests from the audience that their questions had not all been answered, the Executive went on to approve the new arrangements.
* Please note earlier version because of a typographical error rendered this figure as 506. My apologies.
Crest Boys' Academy fails Ofsted Inspection and goes into 'Special Measures'
Crest Boys' Academy in Neasden, Brent, has been put into 'special measures' after being judged 'Inadequate' on all 4 aspects of their June Ofsted inspection: Achievement of Pupils, Quality of Teaching, Behaviour and Safety of Pupils and Leadership and Management.
After a poor Ofsted, Copland Community School is being forced to become an academy. Crest Boys' is already a sponsored academy led by the E-Act chain and has failed despite this status. It has to remain an academy under current law but there may be a possibility of a transfer to another academy chain. Clearly this is a challenge those who make claims for the superiority of academies..
Because Crest is run by an academy chain Brent Council has no direct right to intervene. E-Act is barely mentioned in the Ofsted report but the DfE must surely look at its capacity to support improvement at the school.
The schools decision to seek academy status occurred under the Labour government and was done in order to secure new buildings which are nearing completion.
The situation is further complicated by an approved proposal to open a secondary free school, named Gladstone after the nearby park, in the area. It will offer 120 Year 7 places from September 2014.
On Leadership and Management the report said:
The Crest Girls' Academy, also run by E-Act was found Inadequate overall based on an Inadequate judgement for Achieve of Pupils. Leadership and Management were judged and Quality of Teaching Requiring Improvement. Behaviour and Safety of the girls was judged Good.
Achievement was judged inadequate because of insufficient progress of AS students in the 6th Form which is shared with the Boys' Academy and too few gain qualifications at the end of their programmes of study.
After a poor Ofsted, Copland Community School is being forced to become an academy. Crest Boys' is already a sponsored academy led by the E-Act chain and has failed despite this status. It has to remain an academy under current law but there may be a possibility of a transfer to another academy chain. Clearly this is a challenge those who make claims for the superiority of academies..
Because Crest is run by an academy chain Brent Council has no direct right to intervene. E-Act is barely mentioned in the Ofsted report but the DfE must surely look at its capacity to support improvement at the school.
The schools decision to seek academy status occurred under the Labour government and was done in order to secure new buildings which are nearing completion.
The situation is further complicated by an approved proposal to open a secondary free school, named Gladstone after the nearby park, in the area. It will offer 120 Year 7 places from September 2014.
On Leadership and Management the report said:
Leadership and management are inadequate because the academy is not improving quickly enough. Since the previous inspection, actions taken by leaders and governors to check the progress of different student groups, tackle weaknesses in teaching and behaviour, and to develop the skills of subject leaders have not had enough impact...
Although the Executive Principal and recently appointed senior leaders have a clear agenda for change, improvement since the previous inspection has been too slow. Some leaders lack the skills needed to drive forward rapid improvement and improve teaching. Recently appointed senior leaders have had to take over the leadership and teaching of some subjects, which has placed heavy demands on their time.It makes the following comment on the Governing Body
Frequent changes to staffing this year have made it difficult for new systems designed to improve teaching and behaviour to become fully established and to make a difference to students’ learning. This has prevented leaders and managers from promoting equality of opportunity adequately enough.
Until recently the academy’s monitoring of teaching was too generous and teachers’ performance was not checked thoroughly by leaders and governors. Teachers and leaders are now set challenging targets, linked to students’ progress, which they have to meet before they move up the pay scales.
A restructured governing body has been in place since January 2013. The previous governing body did not check how targets were set to challenge and reward teachers, and was not aware whether additional money for students eligible for extra support was spent appropriately. Current governors understand that improvement has been too slow in the past and agree that aspects of the academy’s work are inadequate. They are not satisfied with the academy’s results and are already challenging decisions to make sure that they are focused on raising achievement and made in the best interests of students. Governors fulfil their statutory responsibilities for safeguarding.Ofsted will be making regular visits to the school to ensure that improvements are made.
The Crest Girls' Academy, also run by E-Act was found Inadequate overall based on an Inadequate judgement for Achieve of Pupils. Leadership and Management were judged and Quality of Teaching Requiring Improvement. Behaviour and Safety of the girls was judged Good.
Achievement was judged inadequate because of insufficient progress of AS students in the 6th Form which is shared with the Boys' Academy and too few gain qualifications at the end of their programmes of study.
Sunday, 15 September 2013
Greens oppose Royal Mail sell off
The Green Party this weekend agreed to oppose the Royal Mail sell off.
Where next for Green Party policy on education?
My motion instructing the Green Party Policy Committee to initiate a policy development process in the light of Coalition policies, which would result in a a redrafted Education Policy being presented to a future Conference, failed to win a majority today. Part of the process I suggested was to invite contributions from relevant teacher unions, educators and parent campaign groups to help shape the review.
One of the arguments against was that there had been a full and very thorough review in 2007 and that this should not be thrown away. Instead it was argued that a series of amendments should be tabled at a future Conference. It was also argued that the review would take time and may not be ready for the election period.
I believe something far more fundamental is required as you'll see from my speech notes, particularly as the ful schope of the Tory strategy was not evident at the time. . I wanted a far broader and participatory process but if we are to have a relevant policy in place for local elections in 2014 and the General Election in 2015 we must start thinking about amendments for Spring Conference now. The policy is 15 pages long so it is a substantial task. The current policy can be read HERE
These are the notes of my speech (not all of which may have been delivered as set out because of the time constraints in a very rushed debate at the en of the morning session).
One of the arguments against was that there had been a full and very thorough review in 2007 and that this should not be thrown away. Instead it was argued that a series of amendments should be tabled at a future Conference. It was also argued that the review would take time and may not be ready for the election period.
I believe something far more fundamental is required as you'll see from my speech notes, particularly as the ful schope of the Tory strategy was not evident at the time. . I wanted a far broader and participatory process but if we are to have a relevant policy in place for local elections in 2014 and the General Election in 2015 we must start thinking about amendments for Spring Conference now. The policy is 15 pages long so it is a substantial task. The current policy can be read HERE
These are the notes of my speech (not all of which may have been delivered as set out because of the time constraints in a very rushed debate at the en of the morning session).
Declaration of Interests: I am a retired member of the NUT and a retired primary headteacher. I am currently chair of governors of two Brent primary schools and help convene the Brent Governors' Forum. I am a trustee of the Brent Play Association and run Brent School Without Walls, a voluntary organisation that provides free nature and outdoor activities in Fryent Country Park for primary classes and out of school clubs.I want to start by acknowledging the work that went into the current policy and the many good and innovative ideas it contains. Don't blame me for the need for revision - blame Michael Gove!The problem is, as Melissa Benn said at the panel on Friday, we are in a period of profound and unprecedented educational change in terms of both speed and ruthlessness. The post - war settlement is being bulldozed into oblivion.This is not just about individual policies but the neoliberal framework - subordination of education to economic aims and accompanying privatisation and profit making and the commodification of childhood.Michael Gove is stealing our schools, our teachers' professionalism and our children's childhood.Teachers 'deliver' lessons to deliver higher test results to deliver higher league table position and thus deliver us from Ofsted! (Prayer)I am involved with many campaigns with parents, governors and teachers and am often asked, where do you stand, what would you do? I have found the present policy wanting in giving a response.The foundation of our policy needs to be strengthened - rejecting the Coalition's ideology and linking our approach to alternative views on the economy as well as the aims of education and the defence of childhood.Although our policies are Green Government 'aspirational' they have to start with present realities and counter them. Don't protest -demand!Areas for revision:Local authorities fast disappearing regarding role in education - academies & free schools and diminishing school improvement services. We need to think about the 'middle tier' and role of Secretary of State. What democratic structures do we propose beyond the school level. What powers should the Secretary of State have?We need to sharpen our critique of free schools and academies to stress issues around accountability, reinforcing social divisions and marketisation. Do we propose reintegration into a locally accountable community school system as we do with private schools? Should all schools have the same 'freedoms' as academies and free schools.Sure Start - reducing and nature of early years education changing. We need more than 'continuing successful schemes such as Sure Start' what is our vision for the early years?Ofsted - we say 'inspections will be revised' but we need to take account of its increasingly politicised role, the fact that it is privatised (Serco, Tribal) and overlaps with academy chains. What sort of school improvement service do we envisage - role and powers? How does this relate to institutions such as the HMI?In our policy we say that the Inspectorate and LAs will be involved in the monitoring of governing body accountability structures - revision needed in the light of academies and free schools and decline in role of LA.Pupil population expansion - because the Government has said any new school should be an academy or free school, LAs are being forced to expand primary schools with some in urban areas having more than 1,000 4-11 year olds and losing play space and additional rooms such as libraries and halls in the process. Again the role of LA in planning and provision has been undermined so we need to reaffirm their right to build new community schools to cope with the rising population.Teacher education - university level teacher education is rapidly disappearing and being replaced by various 'on the job' training schemes with a neglect (and disparagement) of research, cognitive psychology, philosophy of education etc.I hope I have demonstrated sufficient grounds for revision, but more than this I am convinced that with the right policy, actively campaigned for in communities, teacher organisations, parent groups that we have a chance of building massive support and contributing to success in the forthcoming elections as well as having people flocking to support our campaigns. (I mentioned the successful NUT 'It's Time to Stand Up for Education' rallies aimed at parents, governors, teachers and pupils that were held in Brighton, Nottingham and London yesterday)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)