BBC Decision to Exclude the Greens ‘Impoverishes Our Political Debate’

The BBC’s decision not to allocate the Green Party of England and Wales a Party Political Broadcast (PPB) in England fails the electorate and our democracy, say the Greens.

Over recent weeks, the Green Party has written to the BBC three times to appeal the public broadcaster's initial decision to allocate three PPBs to the Liberal Democrats and UKIP each, and none to the Greens.

Over the course of extensive correspondence, Nick Martin, CEO of the Green Party, has sought to demonstrate the Party’s steady and consistent growth in England over the past two election cycles across election types. The Green Party contends that, with this decision, the BBC has failed to fully consider and recognise the pattern and direction of electoral support in England.

In their upcoming Party Election Broadcast (PEB), the Green Party will ensure that the Greens' voice is heard ahead of the London Assembly, Mayoral and local elections in May 2016. The BBC Trusts' decision to recognise the Greens as a major party in the London elections provides the Party with an opportunity to showcase how elected Greens can deliver real change of the common good.

Shahrar Ali, Green Party Deputy Leader, who, alongside Deputy Leader Amelia Womack, handed in an appeal letter to the BBC Trust (3), said:

Our public broadcaster’s decision to freeze the Greens out of the Party Political Broadcasts impoverishes our political debate. Ahead of this May’s elections, the Greens stand on a fresh, distinctive platform. We are the only party who place environmental sustainability at the heart of everything we do; we are united in opposing Trident; and only the Greens are presenting a viable alternative to our stuttering economic system which is insecurely grounded on unequal pay and long hours.

Womack said:

The BBC’s decision means over a million people will not be given the opportunity to hear from the party they voted for last May in a PPB in 2016. While this decision is bitterly disappointing and does a disservice to our democracy, Green politicians, members, activists and supporters will continue to work tirelessly to make sure our voice is heard and that Green values and policies are widely shared.

NUT call on the next Mayor of London to defend education and help teachers create a just society for all.

The NUT will be holding a London Mayoral Hustings on Monday March 7th 6pm at the union's headquarters at Hamilton House, Mabledon Place, WC1H 9BD, near Kings Cross,  off  the south side of Euston Road.

The meeting will be introduced by Christine Blower, NUT General Secretary.

The flyer advertsing the event lists the issues that matter to London teachers:

London's schools are under threat
London is a city full of creativity, talent and potential. Our schools and teachers are amongst the best in the world. Yet this sucess is under real threat.

Spending cuts
School budgets across London face 12% cuts under Government spending plans. In some boroughs, the losses could be over 20%. That would mean understaffed schools, bigger class sizes, more children's needs unmet and a narrower curriculum.

Teacher shortages
Talented, hardworking teachers are being driven out of London's schools by excessive workload, the lack of affordable housing and an exam factory culture which demoralises both staff ansd children.

Poverty and unaffordable housing
Almost 4 in 10 children in the capital grow up in poverty. Unaffordable rents force too many families into unsuitable housing. These conditions impact heavily on children's education and their schools.

Lack of school places
London needs 113,000 more school places to meet demand. Yet our Councils have neither the funds nor the legal powers to open new schools.

Stand Up for London's Education
The NUT belives that every child deserves the best. We have produced a Manifesto for London's schools calling on the next Mayor of London to defend education and help teachers create a just society for all.

Help stand up for education
Come along to our hustings and other local campaign activities across London. Distribute our manifestpoand talk with friends, colleagues and candidates about our demands.

Mail manifesto@nut.org.uk for the NUT's Manifesto for London's schools and colleges

NUT call for 2016 SATs to be suspended as ministers fail the 'test of competence'

-->

I have been hearing concerns from local primary teachers about the new SATs that are due to take place in May so I am not surprised to hear that the NUT is calling for them to be suspended.

This is what the NUT said today:

Nicky Morgan’s new system for testing and assessment of KS1 and KS2 pupils has come apart at the seams. As a result the NUT is calling for the 2015/16 SATs to be suspended.

In early February the DfE published its requirements in relation to teacher assessments of children’s writing standards. These have come far too late in the process. The detail in the exemplifications of the required standards and the number of separate pieces of evidence required for each individual assessment mean that they are impossible for teachers to deliver in the few months between February and June. Since these exemplifications are ‘interim’ and only for this year, they could also change completely again next year.

These proposals add to a chaotic heap of other demands. The reporting date for teachers’ assessments has been brought forward. The ‘expected standard’ that children are required to meet has been pushed upwards, beyond the reach of far too many pupils. The consequences of this shift on the requirement on schools to meet floor standards have not been thought through.

Ministers have failed the test of competence. Nicky Morgan’s pledge to give a year’s notice of substantial changes has been revealed as just a hollow promise.

The NUT is calling for the 2015/16 SATs to be suspended and will be meeting other teaching unions on Thursday 18 February to discuss a joint response.

Only 224 take part in Brent's budget consultation

Much has been made of Brent Coucil's consultation on the budget and so it is interesting to see how many 'self-selected'  people have participated in this budget round. 'Engagement' is clearly an issue.  The numbers and themes are included in the report going before Full Council on Monday:

That is a total of 214 via attendance at meetings plus 10 on line. This is equivalent to fewer than 1 in 1000 of the population of Brent. I am not sure what the cost works out at per person when you take into account cost of room hire and officer overtime. The 7 who attended the Grand Hall consultation at the Civic Centre could have been accommodated in the Leader's office!

I was concerned about the low number of people responding to my on-line poll on the Council Tax rise but it appears that only 3 people had a view on the Council's  own on-line consultation.

These are the new basic Council Tax rates for 2016-17 by band (the usual comparator is Band D)

The plans for 2017 and 2018-19 are HERE. It is worth noting that by 20% more than half of the Council's spending is predicted to be on social care.

Cuts of 20% in full time equivalent posts across Brent's eight services are included in the proposals.

Barry Gardiner and Brent Council at loggerheads over mega primary

The Kilburn Times LINK reports today that Barry Gardiner, Labour MP for Brent North,  accompanied by Martin Dickens, chair of Parents Against Byron Court School Expansion and Suzanne D'Sousa, chair of Sudbury Court Residents Association, met with DfE officials to protest at plans to expand Byron Court Primary School to 5 forms of entry.

Brent Council proposals would increase the school to a total of 1,050 4-11 year olds plus nursery. Gardiner accused the Council of putting their statutory responsibility to provide school places above the well-being of pupils.

Brent Council has been under intense pressure over  primary school places for several years now and has moved from providing ad hoc 'bulge classes' to permanent expansions. The situation is exacerbated by rules under the Coalition and the present government that forbid local authorities from building new schools where they are needed. Instead any new school must be a free school or an academy which is of course dependent on providers coming forward.  Unfortunately this leaves provision at the whim of such providers who often make proposals in areas which are not those of greatest need.

In the secondary sector in Brent some academies have come forward with proposals for a new Brent North secondary free school that they will jointly sponsor.  There haven't been any similar proposals for primary so an increasing number of schools have doubled in size, affecting place space and facilities such as halls and libraries, as well as impacting on the ethos and management of the schools.

One loophole that is rapidly closing is the creation of 'satellite' schools under the auspices of an existing school but in a different building, often some distance from the 'parent' school.  Leopold Primary is such a school with an annex in Brentfield Road.  The DfE is likely to deem these to be new local authority schools in the future and thus not allowed.

I share the view that schools of this size are not suitable for the education of young children.  Sometimes plans are made for expansion with headteachers only for their long-term implementation and consolidation to be left to their successors. The arguments over the education benefot of very large primary schools have beenpreviously on Wembley Matters LINK

Mega primary schools result in highly paid headteachers who often have an 'executive' role quite different from the traditional role of the headteachers of smaller schools. There are increasing difficulties in recruiting new headteachers in the current climate created by government policy and the task of finding suitable candidates for mega primary schools, when current headteachers move on, is daunting.

Government policy, inherited from the Gove era, really must change - it does not serve the interests of children, parents or local democratic accountability.

Brent Council told the Kilburn Times that the decision to approve the expansion would not be reviewed.

This comment on the Council planning site gives a flavour of the opposition to the expansion which it is claimed was opposed by 90% of consultees (unedited)  LINK


There are several words I could use to describe my objection to this application: DISGUST that a proposal which had such overwhelming objection at the public consultation stage was passed through to planning. DISBELIEVE/OUTRAGE that the local councillor and cabinet members response to such objections was that most of them could be resolved at planning - the site is too small meaning the proposed building will be obtrusive to the immediate neighbours and detriment to our children's health as they will no longer be able to enjoy the fast array for physical activities currently available at the school; isolated in an already congested residential area - with increasing congestion and pollutions levels being experienced on East Lane and Watford roads as the main roads serving the estate; the school places are not needed in this area of the borough, Wembley High's primary school (when finished) will already provide a surplus of places in the area meaning the new attendees will have to be travelling some distance coursing further traffic and parking issues in the immediate and wider area (because of the limited public transport available in such an isolated area at the northern most boundary of the borough); and that the proposals are completely out of character for the area - frankly unless you are proposing to relocate the entire school to a more suitable location these are not issues which can be resolved. DISAPPOINTMENT at the behaviour of the Head teacher - backtracking on her own statement of a few years ago that "three form entry was more than big enough for a primary school" and her attempts to garner support from the parents by holding propaganda assemblies about the proposed new facilities with the children, sending them home to tell their parents to support it and the attitude of the school management and councillors in pushing these proposals forward are to the detriment of the local community. A state school, local council and its democratically elected members should be there to serve its community not to impose its own agenda irrespective of the needs and wishes of that community - it is telling that the only comments of support for this application have given the school address or addresses outside of Brent for their authors. As parents, of course we want better facilities for our children, of course we want the existing canteen with its leaky asbestos roof (which should have been condemned decades ago) replaced, of course we want to see the 'temporary structure' (porter cabin classrooms) which have been in use since the 1970's & 80's replaced with permanent classrooms in keeping with the current school architecture. BUT not at the expense of an intimate, cohesive, caring educational establishment which you should expect of a primary school and I am sure you cannot replicate in a school the size of the one being proposed. I urge those with the power to make a decision in this matter to reject it for the good of the children already attending the school and for the wider local community. Why should this small corner of the borough bear the brunt of the councils lack of planning over the last decade for an ever increasing population, coursed both by the increasing birth rate and the unsustainable over development without infrastructure (some distance away from Byron Court) in Alperton and Wembley Park and at other locations across the borough (but not immediately local to Byron Court)?

Meet tomorrow to help plan Grunwick commemoration 40 years on

Painting by Dan Jones

Plans are forging ahead to commemorate the 40th anniversary of the Grunwick strike, one of the most significant events for trade unionists and anti-racists in the last century.

Plans include a mural, a major exhibition in conjunction with Brent Heritage,  a conference and other events initiated by Brent Trades Council and the Willesden Town Team. LINK

There is a meeting tomorrow (Thursday) at 7pm at Brent Trades Hall to further the plans. Everyone welcome - you don't have to be someone who remembers the strike to take part!

Brent Trades Hall (London Apollo Club) 375 High Rd, Willesden, NW10 2JR Dollis Hill tube / Near Willesden Bus Garage

UNISON urges Conservatives to heed Cameron's South Africa sanctions lesson in pension funds row

FROM UNISON

On the eve of their conference last October, the Conservative Party made the surprising announcement they would stop what they call “divisive town hall boycotts and sanctions”. The government planned to address non-existent concerns about “militant divestment campaigns against UK defence and Israeli firms” by introducing new rules to ensure that pension investments and procurement decisions in England and Wales follow UK government foreign policy.

This was clearly pre-conference grandstanding; an opportunity to attack the Labour Party, trade unions and campaign groups like the Palestine Solidarity Campaign (PSC). It is unlikely the Conservative Party really believe “the militant actions of left-wing councils” threaten to “poison community relations and harm Britain’s economic and international interests”, but a gesture to the Israeli government, concerned about EU restrictions on settlement goods, may aid diplomatic relations.

In recent months a number of companies have announced their withdrawal from the illegally occupied West Bank, influenced by the efforts of pension scheme members and the public. The Israeli government have responded by lobbying their counterparts for new laws to restrict boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS), with some success, particularly in the US and now the UK.

In November the Department of Communities and Local Government launched a consultation outlining their plans for the Local Government Pension Scheme (LGPS). Whilst some of the changes are to be welcomed, others give the government unprecedented control over how, and in whose interest, pension funds are invested.

The government want the ability to directly intervene in the investment process in two key ways. Firstly they propose that a proportion of LGPS funds will have to be invested in UK infrastructure. Secondly they want to impose a requirement that investments follow UK foreign policy, and give the secretary of state the power to intervene if they don’t.

It’s clear from the Conservative press release that they want to stop campaigns such as UNISON and PSC’s work, encouraging UNISON branches up and down the country to use their pension funds’ financial muscle to exert pressure on companies that continue to support the illegal occupation of Palestine. Although UK foreign policy recognises “settlements are illegal under international law”, this doesn’t mean that pension funds will be able to divest from companies that support, and financially benefit from, the occupation. The government only highlight the risks of doing business in the Occupied Palestinian Territories, allowing UK companies to decide whether or not to comply with international law.

UNISON believes that pension fund investments should be made in the interests of scheme members, and this is reflected in the EU ‘IORP’ Directive/41/2003 on pensions and the advice of the government’s Law Commission. A pension scheme’s primary concern should be getting a good return for scheme members, but it should also take members concerns into account. If scheme members don’t want their pensions invested in companies involved in the illegal occupation of Palestine, or the manufacture of arms, then their pension fund should take this into account.

UNISON is working hard to get the requirement for pension funds to follow UK Foreign Policy to be dropped, along with the requirement to invest in UK infrastructure. UNISON branches all over the country are responding to the government’s consultation, arguing that the proposed changes breach the EU directive on pensions, and calling for members’ pensions to be invested in members’ interests, not in the interests of the Chancellor of the Exchequer. Other groups working on environmental issues, arms and human rights are also concerned that the changes will also impact on them, and are responding to the consultation. You should do the same, before it closes on 19 February.

The government won’t consult on their proposed changes to procurement regulations; they will simply try to issue a revised policy note banning boycotts. The Thatcher government passed similar legislation as part of the infamous 1988 Local Government Act, to stop local councils boycotting companies doing business with apartheid South Africa.

In 2006 David Cameron said “The mistakes my party made in the past with respect to relations with the ANC and sanctions on South Africa make it all the more important to listen now”. We hope his party does listen before they make the same mistake all over again.


UNISON has produced a guide to pension fund engagement and divestment:  LINK

On line tool to add your voice to the campaign LINK

Stand up for Climate Justice - Support the Heathrow 13 Wednesday February 24th

The #Heathrow13 will return to court for final sentencing, on Wednesday February  24th at Willesden Magistrates Court, having all been found guilty of aggravated trespass and entering the security restricted area of London Heathrow Airport’s (LHR) north runway in protest of plans to build a third runway. All 13 have been told by District Judge Deborah Wright that they "should all come expecting custodial sentences”,

Caroline Lucas MP said:

Sending the Heathrow 13 to prison would be utterly unwarranted. They took a principled and non-violent stand against the colossal environmental cost of expanding an airport that already breaches air pollution laws- yet they’re being treated is if they are somehow a danger to society.

The real danger we face are the toxic fumes emitted by airports and the looming threat of catastrophic climate change. Sending these committed activists to jail would be deeply unjust.

Please come and join the protest  OUTSIDE the court from 9am SHARP to 10am, together with Heathrow residents and others, to say that climate justice is the only appropriate form of justice here; that prison time for protecting the climate is a massive #Redline, and that we need to Stop Aviation Expansion & Stop Co2lonialism!

Come ready to express your solidarity, be it in song, spoken word, festival or dancing, as we co-create and animate our climate defence in support of the #Heathrow13

Sentencing expected around noon. Your solidarity is welcome all day here on FB and on Twitter #Heathrow13

The full address for the court is:
Willesden Magistrates’ Court
448 High Road
London
NW10 2DZ
Nearest tube: Neasden OR Dollis Hill (Jubilee Line)

Note: the solidarity hashtag will be #Heathrow13 so please keep sending your support before and on the day!

Note: The sentencing hearing will start at 10am, and we have been informed access inside the court has been ticketed and restricted to family only.