Copland IEB opts for 'No Trust' status

 Guest blog from 'Deleted'

Another 25 teachers at Copland have been notified that they are on a new redundancy hit-list for sacking at the end of the summer term. This follows the dozens of staff who have already been sacked since last July when Brent Council sent in an Interim Executive Board (IEB) to run the school (down).

Why is the Copland IEB now being called the Copland  Lie EB? 

In the autumn they said there would be no forced redundancies. Just weeks later they are  ‘consulting’ (telling) 25 staff that in the (new) next stage of ‘staff reorganisation’ (sacking),  14 of their ‘posts will be deleted’ (14 people will be sacked).  You can apply for ‘voluntary’ redundancy  (ie sack yourself and get a bit of compensation) or wait for the school to sack you. Whichever way, it’s forced, it’s compulsory and it’s the sack. 

What do the Lie E.B give as their reasons for the sackings?

They say they’ve got more teachers than they need. Well, they would have really, wouldn’t they? It’s a measure of the Lie E.B’s success in practically closing down the 6^th form  and producing an Austerity Curriculum for the rest of the school. Since last July they’ve scrapped  all the 6^th form vocational subjects, loads of successful  A level and GCSE subjects, got rid of support teachers and  mentoring staff and the latest statement from them scraps Business Studies, effectively scraps Yr 7,8 and 9 Information Technology  and gets rid of Art.  They turned away good potential 6^th Form students last August when they told them at the last minute they’d have to go elsewhere as they’d scrapped their subjects. They’ve narrowed the school’s curriculum offer to make it so unattractive that only 40 parents put Copland down as first choice for Sept 2014 (even less than Michaela ‘Free’ School, and they don’t even have a viable building).

Then add to that the continuing flow of inept and embarrassing decisions (scrapping Sports Days, charity events,  prize-giving evenings, progressive student associations, etc etc) which have produced columns of print in the local and national press, campaigns on social media, and disbelief among current and former  students and staff. So, dismantle the curriculum, halve the intake and, hey presto, you’ve got too many teachers! 

This is called ‘vision’.

It’s basically the same technique as the Tories have used against the NHS. Regard the institution and its staff as the enemy. Run it down, highlight all its defects. Cut staff, provide worse services to the point where no one will want to bother to fight to save it. Then flog it off to a chain.

But isn’t Copland becoming an Academy in September? Won’t they need teachers?

Of course, and no one believes that an academy chain intends to run a school with no subjects and no decent curriculum offer. After they’ve thrown away all this experience and knowledge  in this year’s sackings they’ll start advertising for new teachers, with all the expense and waste (and risk) that entails. But the new staff will be young and cheap and obedient, advised not to talk to other staff out of their rank and not to join the union. They’ll be on short-term, hire-and-fire contracts and staff turnover will be high. In a few years’ time they’ll all be agency staff and many will probably be on zero-hours contracts. Most will give up teaching in less than 5 years. This is not a prediction; it’s already happening. This is Gove’s  ‘future’ (with the acquiescence of the Copland management, it’s imported  IEB, Brent’s Michael Pavey and Mohammed Butt). And it’s what Copland staff are resisting.

Ok. But the ‘no compulsory redundancies’ promise was only a small untruth and maybe was meant only to refer to the last sacking round, no reason to call the IEB the Lie EB is it?

Yes, because the last sacking round was supposed to be the final sacking round (apart from a Leadership cull which now seems to have been  postponed until next year).  The proposed review of TLRs has not appeared and these new sackings have come out of the blue.

But there’s something else. The sacking letters Copland staff now regularly receive have always  referred  to financial reasons for the sackings and regularly trot out the excuse of  ‘the accumulated budget deficit which is currently in excess of £1.5 million’.         

                                                                                                                                              

2 points about this:

The ‘budget deficit’ dates from the time when the recently-convicted –in-the- courts (and earlier-knighted-by- the-Queen) ex-Head Davies ran the show. Brent Council only acted to stop his activities after being embarrassed into intervening  by union action,  have never made any attempt to retrieve the alleged £2.7 million taken from the school and did not even seek costs at his trial. (Why not?  The judge didn’t know either. Choose your own conspiracy theory).

More importantly, this is what Ark Schools, in a written answer,  told Copland staff would happen  to  this deficit when the school becomes an academy in September 2014:

It is normal practice for the deficit to be set to zero by the local authority when a school becomes an academy.

Copland staff should not have to rely on outsiders like Ark Schools  for information affecting their futures  which their own governing body should supply them with.  It would appear that, at the date the current sackings take effect (end of academic year 2013/2014), the deficit will be ‘set to zero by the local authority’.  So in August, yet more  Copland staff will lose their livelihoods in order to  reduce a budget deficit which will not any longer exist. The IEB’s reference to the ‘accumulated budget deficit’ as a justification for  dismantling the school and sacking the majority of its staff  is therefore disingenuous, an obfuscation. 

Or, in plainer English, a lie.

         I  EB?          Or Lie  EB?      Or does it just amount to the same truth-twisting  thing?

 

A thriving and well organised library lives on in NW2

At a time when many Brent residents are still mourning the loss of their local libraries it was heartening to visit Braintcroft Primary School in Warren Road, NW2, this afternoon and see the well organised and beautifully cared for library being used by the children.

These pictures were taken after school:

In another contribution to literacy in the borough, the school last year became a training centre for Reading Recovery after the closure of the Brent School Improvement Service's facility.

A special room has been set up where Reading Recovery teachers can observe colleague's teaching behind a 'mirror' screen to learn, share and discuss the strategies pioneered by Marie Clay. Reading Recovery is carried out on an intensive 1:1 basis with proven success but is under threat in some areas because it is seen as expensive.

The Governing Body at Braintcroft decided that Reading Recovery was too precious a resource to be lost to the borough and employed the key Reading Recovery trainer and financed the building of the training room. Local schools now buy into the service..

More information on Reading Recovery HERE

Are the Crest Academies on the EACT transfer list?

I haven't been able to establish yet whether the Crest Boys' and Girls' Academies are included in the 10 E-Act schools that the DfE yesterday ordered to be transferred to other academy chains. Ofsted put the boys' school into special measures last year and judged the girls' school as inadequate as reported here LINK  Under current legislation academies cannot be transferred back to local authority status.

If they are on the list it is possible that they could be added to Ark's Brent empire.

The Anti Academies Alliance reacted to the news with the following statement:

The removal of 10 schools from the EACT academy chain is the most spectacular failure in British post war education history. No Local Authority ever failed so dismally. Even when Islington Council’s education service was deemed beyond repair in the mid 1990’s it only had 3 ‘failing’ secondary schools!

EACT’s catastrophe is a personal humiliation for Sir Bruce Liddington, former Permanent Secretary at the DfE and head of the Academies Division. He was one of the chief architects of the Academies Programme before sliding seamlessly into the private sector to pocket £300,000 pa. salary plus benefits as CEO of EACT. It earned him the dubious title of the ‘fattest, fat cat in education’.

But the catastrophe is much more than this. First and foremost it is a betrayal of the children and families who go these schools. They were sold a lie that the private sector would be better. Blair, Adonis, and Gove have all claimed that there was something in the ‘DNA of private education’ that would improve state schools. Of course some academies have done well, although increasingly the evidence suggests that this is more the result of changing intakes rather than a ‘magic dust’ sprinkled by sponsors.

The EACT catastrophe therefore signals the death of the credibility of the Academies programme. David Cameron’s shoddy claims to localism are also in tatters as the all-powerful Secretary of State, Chairman Gove steps in to micro-manage our schools. After just over a decade of controversy, the Academies Programme experiment has failed. Any governing body currently considering conversion should halt it immediately whilst a full and public enquiry is conducted. And if governors won’t stop conversion, then staff and parents should take matters into their own hands and stop this madness by any means necessary.

But here’s the rub! Due to the reckless behaviour of those who have legislated on education policy over the last decade, the Academies Programme will continue like a zombie. There is no mechanism to halt it, to restore schools to Local Authorities and to ensure that they are properly functioning. Only Gove has the power to decide the future of these schools. The whole system of checks and balances, of accountability and credibility has been smashed up in pursuit of a ‘supply side revolution’.

And, worst still, there is not a single cabinet minister or front bench spokesperson from the Coalition or the Opposition who will stand up and admit ‘we got it wrong’. The unregulated education market was a train wreck waiting to happen. Estelle Morris warned of this ‘direction of travel’ a decade ago. But the zombie politicians still stagger around Westminster singing its praises.

As Sweden picks over the bones of its rotten marketised system, who will have the courage to call a halt to this reckless policy

Sabina Khan selected to fight Stonebridge ward

Sabina Khan at the Defend London's NHS demonstration

Sabina Khan, who made a good showing for the Brent Central parliamentary nomination, has been selected by Labour to stand for Stonebridge ward in the forthcoming local elections.

A vacancy arose when one of the women candidates dropped out earlier this year.

South Kilburn regeneration threatened by HS2

An officers' report going before the Full Council Meeting on March 3rd asks members 'if considered expedient' to resolve to oppose the HS2 Bill  and consider 'the passing of further resolutions..to authorise the deposit of a petition against the Bill in either or both Houses of Parliament'.

The report suggests that location of the proposed ventilation shaft and transformer (see CGI above), next to Queen's Park Station, would have an adverse affect 'not only on that site but also on the Council's regeneration plans for the wider South Kilburn area'.

The report states that there are a number of good reasons to offer broad strategic support for HS2 in terms of improved connectivity and job opportunities in areas such as Old Oak Common, but  identifies three negative impacts on the borough.

1, The Bill seeks powers for the compulsory acquisition of  'all interests' in land in South Kilburn 'which does not appear to be required to implement the proposed new high speed railway line.  The land includes parts of the South Kilburn Estate including St Mary's School, parts of site 11b, Alpha and Gorefield Houses and the new development on Cambridge Road and Chichester Road. It is also proposed that some land will be possessed on a temporary basis and the Council states that it sees no reason why the sites above should be permanently acquired by HS2 and should petition on this basis if discussions with HS2 fail.

2.  The Council has approved plans for the Queens Park Car Park site (Site 18 in the South Kilburn Regeneration Programme)  which involves demolition of Cullen House, Keniston House, Premier House and the Falcon Pub and the erection of 137 flats (39 of which are affordable), public space, office and commercial shop space.  The HS2 plans for a ventilation shaft and transformer would disrupt these plans with a loss to the Council and also affect the decanting of residents on the South Kilburn Estate during regeneration.

The Council has put forward an alternatiuve plan for the ventilation shaft  to go on the east side of Queen's Park Station but HS2 said although that was technically possible  their preferred site was still the original proposals because of  'changes that would otherwise be required to the alignment of the proposed HS2 tunnel, access issues and a likely increase in temporary impacts during construction on nearby residents and a local school'.

A subsequent  report from Lambert Smith Hampton, commissioned by the Council, concluded that there was a 'clear economic and financial benefit associated with relocating the ventilation shaft and auto transformer from Site 18 to the alternative Canterbury Works site. The Council will challenge the adequacy of the project's  Environment Statement on the basis of:

• Inadequate consideration of alternative sites for the proposed ventilation shaft and transform
• No proper justification for the current design and scale of proposals
• Incorrect baseline assumptions
• Inaccurate assessment of effects; and
• Lack of/inadequate mitigations proposed

3. Brent Council  supports the proposals for a new interchange between HS2 and Crossrail at Old Oak Common, including links between the interchange and the West London Line and North London Line. However they also think that additional value could be achieved for a new rail link between Cross Rail an the West Coast Mainline.

The report argues that such a link would enable users of  London Midland Services to transfer onto Crossrail, 'providing improved services straight into central London. It would ease congestion at Euston and  save passenger time. Officers suggest, 'By accommodating the future delivery of this link as part of the HS2 construction plans at Oak Old Common, there would be an opportunity for trains to run to Wembley with a direct link on to Heathrow and services to the West of England.'.

Officers recommend  that the Council considers supporting any petition by TfL for the delivery of enabling works at Old Oak Common to allow for this link.

The report discusses the uncertainties over the amount of compensation the Council might receive from compulsory purchase but goes on to state,  'It is clear that several millions of value are at risk from the HS2 proposals as they currently stand.'

The report sets out the estimated costs of Petitioning the HS2 Bill:

Ventilation Shaft: £150,000
Compulsory Purchase Order £40,000
West Coast Mainline Route £380,000

The report recommends the first two only.

Brent Council's spending cut by £18m in proposed 2014-15 budget

Full Council on March 3rd will vote on the 2014-15 Budget which incorporates £17.8m reduction in service areas as set out below:

The situation is likely to be even worse in 2015-16 with a budget gap expected to be more than £33m.  The report going to the meeting states that the Council since 2010 has made £80m 'savings' at an average impact of £702 per household.'  The Council Tax proposed is £1,357.94 for a benchmark Band D property.

Further details on the impact of the savings/cuts are set out in the document below:

Rise up against the Coalition on Climate Change and Fuel Poverty

Left to Right: Sophie Neuborg, Suzanne Jeffery, Martin Francis (Chair) Ruth London, Murad Qureshi

There were stirring calls for action on climate change and energy when Brent residents met together at an urgent meeting on 'Energy Crisis, Climate Crisis - What is the solution?' at Chalkhill Primary School, Wembley.

Suzanne Jeffery, from One Million Climate Jobs, said that the Coalition Government had been exposed by the recent floods. The recognition of the connection between extreme weather events and climate change revealed Cameron's dismissal of 'green crap' as particularly ill-timed. In fact the government had locked the country into rising emissions that accelerated climate change through the 'dash for gas' and fracking, and Osborn's collusion with the oil and energy industries in his budget statement. Deregulation of planning regulations and cuts to the Environment Agency had worsened the impact of the highest ever rainfall last month.

With scientists predicting devastating consequences of a failure to act, campaigners had to use this period of heightened awareness to press home the message that there is still, just, time to act. There needed to be investment in renewable energy and a massive programme of insulation and other green measures through the creation of one million climate change jobs. As well as contributing to reducing energy usage and thus carbon emissions, they would also boost the economy.

Ruth London, from Fuel Poverty Action, said that 'climate change is poverty' as people unable to heat their homes or cook their food because of the high costs of energy were impacted by cold and damp and resulting ill-health and strain on relationships. Education was affected when children did not have a comfortable place to do their homework.  Fossil energy is subsidised and renewables are actually cheaper. The London Pensioners' Association had recognised this when they had passed a resolution calling for safe, clean energy.

Government policy meant that Housing Associations were scrapping insulation schemes and that some attempts at market solutions to the problem had been abandoned.  She said that the probloems was built into the nature of the market where the primary purpose was acculumation. The market was the opposite of caring:: 'what's good for thje market has nothing to do with what's good for people'.

Sophie Neuborg of Friends of the Earth said that there was a major crisis with 7 million people paying over 10% of their income to keep their houses warm and this would be 9m by 2016. FoE believed that energy saving measures should be supported from general taxation rather than levies on fuel bills. More incentives were needed to persuade landlords to make their properties energy efficient and hypothecated carbon taxes needed. She called for a revolution in the way energy was produced through community production of renewable energy.

Link to FoE actions including petition on fracking HERE

Murad Qureshi, London Assembly Member and chair of its Environment Committee, spoke about the highest rainfall levelo for 250 years, record river flows and rising ground water levels. The Thames Barrier, which had saved London from major flooding, and built by the GLC, would not have been built in current times.

He called for work envisaged for the future on flood defences to be brought forward. The Thames should be seen as an extension of the sea into London to bring home the issue. River restoration was needed in terms of London's hidden culverted rivers to protect the 24,000 London homes at high risk of flooding and there needed to be a stop to the concreting over of gardens that had removed the equivalent of 18 Hyde Parks from the capital.* We have to learn with live with water through adaptation and mitigations. Surveys had shown that 80% of the population were concerned not with housing or transport but with the high costs of gas, electricity and water. 68% had reduced their energy consumption because of the cost and half a million were depednent on food backs.

Boris Johnson had failed to take on the energy companies with EDF failing to deliver on their Olympic promises. The Mayor's retrofitting scheme had failed to meet its target with only 99,000 properties tackled amongst the millions in London.

In the discussion that followed there were calls for mass demonstrations on climate change, re-nationalisation of the energy and water companies on a more participative and response model that previously, action against British Gas in particular, campaigns against pre-payment meters and how they make the poor pay more - including Can't Pay-Won't Pay, pickets of the BBC over their insistence on 'balancing' discussion over climate change giving equal time to the sceptics, demand new housing incorporates solar ppwer roof tiles, and the need to reach out to faith groups about the issue.

Videos of the event can be found here:

Introduction and Suzanne Jefferies http://youtu.be/MbzDUNHynxQ

Ruth London http://youtu.be/7gSPwiWXHvw

Sophie Neuberg http://youtu.be/RbyATRY5NFY

Murad Qureshi http://youtu.be/VLb45JLTBRY

Questions and discussion 1  http://youtu.be/qWBtR2xGn0Y

Questions and discussion 2  http://youtu.be/JlzAru-abnc

* I am disappointed that so much of the Quintain development around the Civic Centre and Wembley Stadium is hard landscaping with potted shrubs. We were promised new parks which I imagined would include grassed areas and flower beds - as well as children's play faciltities.. A question of maintenance costs?

Where does Barry Gardiner stand on fracking?

I was approached recently by some neighbours, concerned about the environment and the future of their young children, and therefore interested in  their MP's position on fracking.  They knew that the Green Party  POLICY LINK was opposed to fracking anywhere in the UK but were not sure about Labour's position. Labour Brent Council had opposed fracking in Brent but not elsewhere.

I said that Labour appeared to be ambivalent but undertook to write to our Brent North MP, Barry Gardiner, a shadow minister for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, for an authoritative statement:

This is what he said:

I know there has been real concern about the potential environmental dangers of fracking and I agree that this process should only go ahead if it is safe and environmentally sound. Indeed, it is only by fully addressing legitimate environmental and safety concerns about fracking through robust regulation and comprehensive monitoring, that people will have confidence that the extraction of shale gas is a safe and reliable source that can contribute to the UK's energy mix.

Shale gas does potentially offer an opportunity for the UK to improve our security of energy supply, to replace depleted North Sea gas reserves and to displace some of the gas we currently import. Shale has should not, therefore, be dismissed and I believe it is right that any communities that do host nationally significant energy infrastructure are able to share its rewards.

However, the Government also need to get their priorities right and I do not believe that fracking is the silver bullet for all our energy needs that the Government seem to suggest. Indeed, it is unlikely that it will be possible to extract shale gas in large volumes in the immediate future in the UK or that it will make a significant difference to consumer bills.

Given this and the legitimate safety and environmental concerns that have been expressed, I believe there should be a cautious and proportionate approach to shale gas exploration.

It is also unhelpful for the Government to have established a false opposition between shale gas extraction and investment in renewable energy. Gas will, of course, continue to play a part in our short and medium term energy mix but here is not reason why this should preclude heavy investment in renewable generation, which represents the long-term future of our energy sector.

I know that some environmental groups have also expressed concern about the Government's approach to encouraging shale gas production and I hope the Government will now listen to these concerns and adopt a more cautious and proportionate approach that address key safety and environmental concerns.

Protests continue against fracking in Barton Moss, Salford. Report HERE