Midhurst or Easebourne – Democracy in whose hands?
From NAME Click here for their blog
NAME (No Academy in Midhurst and Easebourne) have expressed concern over who would exert the most influence in decisions about the siting of the proposed academy for Easebourne or Midhurst were it to go ahead. NAME spokesman Simon Boxley said this week,
“The issue of the site of the new school is tied up with the academy question. Do we really think that central government would have any interest in whether to go for Easebourne or Midhurst if this were a decision on a local authority school? Of course not. Partnership for Schools would be involved, but it would be a matter for local planners, councillors and communities. If we have an academy, it’s a different matter. The Expression of Interest for our academy is clear: the choice of site has to be acceptable to the Department for Children, Schools and Families, and subject to discussions with the sponsor as well as Partnership for Schools and the local authority.”
NAME fears that this is yet another feature of the academy process which will take democratic influence further from the community and place it in the hands of Westminster politicians and unelected bodies. Simon Boxley added:
“There is a real danger here that politicians in Westminster won’t understand the significance of re-siting the proposed academy in Easebourne. From the sponsor’s and the government’s perspective it looks very tempting: the area can be completely cleared to make way for new high-prestige academy-style architecture in a way the old Grammar School site can’t. But this entirely misses the point. We’ve said all along, our schools should stay a part of our communities. That means the choice of the site of the school should be ours, just as it should be our choice what kind of school we get. Erecting a shiny academy in Easebourne would be like dropping a spaceship in our midst, and just add to the sense of disconnection between the academy and the community it’s meant to serve. The only way to ensure that we have our say is to insist – no academy for Midhurst OR Easebourne.”
If the Academy were to be approved, a Partnership for Schools representative would make ‘recommendations’ regarding the site this summer, and the decision could be made as early as this autumn. By that stage the academy would be open and it would be too late for the community to say “what about us”? If we’re lucky we might get another ‘consultation’!
NAME (No Academy in Midhurst and Easebourne) have expressed concern over who would exert the most influence in decisions about the siting of the proposed academy for Easebourne or Midhurst were it to go ahead. NAME spokesman Simon Boxley said this week,
“The issue of the site of the new school is tied up with the academy question. Do we really think that central government would have any interest in whether to go for Easebourne or Midhurst if this were a decision on a local authority school? Of course not. Partnership for Schools would be involved, but it would be a matter for local planners, councillors and communities. If we have an academy, it’s a different matter. The Expression of Interest for our academy is clear: the choice of site has to be acceptable to the Department for Children, Schools and Families, and subject to discussions with the sponsor as well as Partnership for Schools and the local authority.”
NAME fears that this is yet another feature of the academy process which will take democratic influence further from the community and place it in the hands of Westminster politicians and unelected bodies. Simon Boxley added:
“There is a real danger here that politicians in Westminster won’t understand the significance of re-siting the proposed academy in Easebourne. From the sponsor’s and the government’s perspective it looks very tempting: the area can be completely cleared to make way for new high-prestige academy-style architecture in a way the old Grammar School site can’t. But this entirely misses the point. We’ve said all along, our schools should stay a part of our communities. That means the choice of the site of the school should be ours, just as it should be our choice what kind of school we get. Erecting a shiny academy in Easebourne would be like dropping a spaceship in our midst, and just add to the sense of disconnection between the academy and the community it’s meant to serve. The only way to ensure that we have our say is to insist – no academy for Midhurst OR Easebourne.”
If the Academy were to be approved, a Partnership for Schools representative would make ‘recommendations’ regarding the site this summer, and the decision could be made as early as this autumn. By that stage the academy would be open and it would be too late for the community to say “what about us”? If we’re lucky we might get another ‘consultation’!
Labels: Academies
posted by West Sussex Teachers' Association at
8:34 AM
<< Home