The third reading and final stages of the Academies Bill in the House of Commons were seen shortly before the summer recess. In common with other MPs, I watched with astonishment as we rattled through the numerous amendments. The haste with which this piece of legislation has been rushed through Parliament signals the Government’s determination to see it become law.
Yet there is considerable discontent on both Labour and Liberal Democrat benches. The concern is not just about the speed, but the legislation itself, which has far-reaching implications and points to the kind of society the Tories are determined to create.
Like many others, I had deep concerns about Labour’s academy programme, but these new academies are a different beast altogether. The new bill breaks up the local authority family, leaving schools free to go it alone in competition with one another, inevitably creating winners and losers among children.
The new schools will attract money for start-up costs and will initially be open to schools deemed “outstanding”. This is an inversion of Labour’s policy, which was about getting funding into deprived areas.
Children who attend outstanding schools are significantly less likely to receive free school meals. However, in a time of economic cuts, the money is being pushed towards them first. It is hard to believe that children in other schools won’t be left behind.
In fact, the changes are clearly going to impact on them, since local authorities provide services – such as support for children with special educational needs – from central funding based on contributions from all schools. If there are fewer schools in the scheme, there will be less money. Sadly, the Commons has voted through a bill which will further disadvantage some of the most disadvantaged children in this country on the basis that it provides more freedom for children. What the Conservatives fail to understand is that freedom for one group of children can represent loss of freedom for another.
The Government is even refusing to ensure that schools which opt for academy status have consulted with those affected. There is no requirement for the head teacher and governors to consult parents, children, staff or their local authority. Thus there is no requirement for schools to consider the impact on anyone other than the children in their school.
The bill is counter-intuitive on many levels. The Government claims to be in favour of a “Big Society”, but doesn’t want to hear the wider community’s views on its academy programme. Ministers say they trust parents, but won’t ensure that parents have a say over the future of their children’s schools. They tell us they want to trust and empower professionals, but are denying them a voice.
The Tories have argued that decision-making should be devolved to communities. However, by removing the local authority, they are giving the Secretary of State direct control over academies and centralising the education system.
While the Academies Bill may be a puzzle when looked at in isolation, taken together with the package of announcements about children, things becomes a little clearer. Children from poorer backgrounds have lost their child trust funds in the past few weeks.
Under forthcoming proposals, they could lose the chance to go to university because of higher fees or reduced places.
The fortunate children in my constituency who do get to university in future will most likely have to attend those that charge the lowest fees. Access to Sure Start is being restricted so that it will become a service reserved exclusively for the poor. And now, under the Academies Bill, these same children are being asked to fend for themselves in a competitive system in which they will have very little chance of breaking through.
This means children from the most deprived backgrounds and those from more privileged backgrounds may never meet – not at Sure Start, school or university. This is the true meaning of the Tories’ offer of “freedom”: it’s the freedom to adopt an individualistic approach that undermines the very ethos of state education.
It is too early to tell whether many schools will opt to become academies. Nevertheless, it already clear that, if they do, it will lead to greater social segregation in which those who can afford to may do better, but will do so under the state system with subsidy from the state.
I am appalled by that prospect and have given my word to the parents, staff, governors and children in Wigan that I will oppose it all the way – if for no other reason than we have already seen where it can lead. We saw it in the fractured society of the 1980s and we must not return to that again.
