There was disappointment and anger last night at The Village School when Brent Council leader did not show up for the consultation meeting about proposals that the school academise in order to become a Multi Academy Trust with Woodfield School.
At the lobby earlier this year Cllr Butt and lead member for children and families, Cllr Mili Patel, had been asked to make a strong and clear statement of opposition to the proposal. Both Brent Central and Brent North CLPs have passed unananimous motions against academisation.
Instead of appearing at the meeting and taking questions, Cllr Butt instead chose to write today to all members of staff about the issue. The position he takes on academisation is weaker than that requested by his own Labour Party members. He expresses a preference for local authority oversight of schools but appears to believe that The Village has no choice. He also takes a traditional right-wing position on teacher strikes claiming that they 'punish' families and children for government policies and calling for next week's three day strike to be called off.
The letter requires close textual analysis to establish Butt's exact position and even then...
-->
POTENTIAL TO ESTABLISH A MULTI ACADEMY TRUST
I know there’s
some concern and uncertainty about what’s going on so I thought it might help
if I set out my position . First of all, I am opposed to the forced
academisation of schools and find it deeply regrettable that TVS has been put
in a situation with such limited options.
Responsibility for this rests with
government and government alone. That said, circumstances being what they are,
I recognise why a formal relationship with Woodfield is a positive thing . I
see why, in the present legislative context and financial climate, both schools
feel that an official partnership would be in their best interests. And, while
forming a MAT may well produce tangible education al benefits, as well as
economies of scale, its main purpose will be increasing the likelihood of
sustaining both schools’ outstanding status.
TVS is a
fantastic school, there’s no doubt about that – in fact, I’m not sure
‘outstanding’ does it justice. As I see it, its success is a product of all
involved being so dedicated to what they do and so determined to ensure every
student has every opportunity to realise their fullest potential. My belief is
that the school’s greatest asset is this collective strength and I have no
reason to suspect this will change as a result of formalising the partnership.
As Leader of the Council in a time of austerity I know only too well the
essential nature of closer collaboration. As a proud trade unionist , I will
always champion the enormous value of collective bargaining . Being able to
speak with a single, unified voice is a powerful thing and one of the many
reasons I welcomed the NUT and ATL teachers ’ unions’ decision to join forces
and create the NEU. And, as a member of the Labour Party, I hold on to the
central tenet that , by the strength of our common endeavour , we achieve more
than we achieve alone. On that basis, I cannot in good conscience seek to deny
TVS and Woodfield the same opportunity for sustainable partnership.
Of course,
I’d much prefer that responsibility for overseeing our schools remain devolved
to local government. I think local people are best placed to understand local
needs. Equally , I’m not sure that the Secretary of State , the Department for
Education , or the Regional School Commissioner have the capacity for nuanced
management of what, as a result of this government’s actions , is an
unhelpfully centralised and drastically underfunded education system.
I have
said previously that my priority is the best possible educational outcomes for
children and young people . What I should have also said is that those outcomes
are best served, and can only be assured, by retaining a happy, motivated, stable
workforce. I know that TVS is ordinarily a very happy, very special place to
work. I also know there are genuinely held concerns that becoming an academy
will mean that’s no longer the case. With that in mind, I think it necessary to
challenge the suggestion that these proposals will have a detrimental impact .
I also need to address claims that, even if a suitable deal can be agreed, any
such agreement cannot be guaranteed in perpetuity
-->
On the
first point, I welcome the school’s pledge to ‘embed core principles’ in a
legally binding agreement. This includes an explicit public commitment to abide
by national terms and conditions for all existing and future teaching staff and
local terms and conditions for all existing and future support staff. This
process has the added advantage of being based on an existing Trustees
Agreement – drafted in concert with NUT reps – that enabled Manor to convert to
academy status and join BSAT without objection last year. On the second, to
provide maximum possible certainty, a range of protections will be built into
the agreement. This has been described as a ‘triple lock’ but may actually
include as many as five provisions designed to make it impossible for
fundamental changes to be made in the future by Trustees or Governors without
undergoing rigorous public scrutiny or a substantial majority on any relevant
vote.
I’m aware
that the NEU have requested a temporary halt to the consultation to try and
find an alternative solution . Given how long this matter has been under
discussion, and given how closely involved union reps have been throughout ,
were there another way forward, it surely would have presented itself by now.
Again, I wish there was a way for TVS and Woodfield to protect their
relationship without having to academise . But , as things stand, there isn’t.
With that in mind, the responsible thing to do now is work together and ensure
as robust and informed a decision as possible is made.
Furthermore, I think it
would be a grave mistake to punish these children and their families for
government policies to which we are ideologically opposed. Similarly, I know
how hard a personal decision it is to take industrial action, especially when
it disrupts the lives of people we care about. And I doubt anyone relishes the
prospect of three days’ without pay. I ask then that any further strike action
be called off and that those involved instead continue to engage fully in the
consultation, ensuring that everyone’s views are made clear.
As I’ve
said, the Labour Party, the Council, and the teachers unions all recognise,
value, and benefit from the enormous power of formal partnerships. On that
basis , whatever our views on the mechanism, we should all be able to
understand and accept the rationale for these outstanding schools doing the
same.
Thank you
for taking the time to consider my thoughts – do please get in touch and let me
know what you think.
