Tories snatch £380m from Brent schools

By Mary Arnold

The coalition government’s recent announcements cancelling Building Schools for the Future capital programmes has deprived Brent schools of £80m funding allocated last January to rebuild, remodel and expand four secondary schools initially and a further £300m for the remaining secondaries.

This is an enormous setback for the children, teachers and indeed communities who have invested in the plans, been inspired and had their expectations raised by the promise of a 21st century learning environment. And judging by the stories emerging at the recent rally of parents, schoolchildren and unions to lobby MPs at Westminster, this is the tip of the iceberg across the country. It means that children will be taught in buildings not fit for purpose and in larger classes as there will not be enough school places for Brent’s children, as a result.

SIGN the petition against ConDem education cuts on Glenda

Jackson’s website http://glenda-jackson.co.uk

The announcement, which initially did not name the four schools accurately, came on top of £1.8m government cuts in grants affecting Brent’s children’s services, meaning less funding for youth projects and activities, less for careers and other advice and less for improving nursery places, just at a time when young people need more help to achieve their potential and to get a job and families need more help accessing quality childcare, especially if both parents want to work.

Over the last 13 years, Labour invested in Brent’s schools, year-on-year, producing higher standards with results above the national average and narrowing the achievement gap. Fewer schools have been in special measures and more children have stayed in education or training including apprenticeships. But instead of building on success, the Lib Dem/Tory government has put all this is at stake with no alternatives for capital investment as it rushes through the Academies Bill inviting schools to opt out of local authority control.

This coalition government option is initially for ‘outstanding’ schools in contrast to the original model, meaning that schools already doing well could opt to attract additional funds from local authority central services leaving less to support Brent’s family of schools. These new ‘academies’ would not be accountable to the local authority (and taxpayer) and there is some doubt whether their admissions criteria would be subject to its approval. As the school year ends in a policy vacuum, it is important to thank teachers in recognition of their enormous contribution and to collaborate in the interests of all Brent’s children in the future.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed.