Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!
Forced Academies, the Department for Education and Haringey
I assume that most people have read about Michael Gove's Forced Academies.
A few of us have been trying to discover what went on between Department for Education officials and Haringey's head honchos (HHH) over many months before the latter deigned to give out even basic information. And I don't just mean making it public, but telling school governors, head teachers, staff, and parents. Not to mention some "Cabinet" members and even pond-life councillors.
There are strong opinions for and against Mr Gove's forced academies. But whatever your views - or even if you are indifferent - I hope we can agree there should have been full disclosure of information about the issue as soon as the HHH realised what was happening. Instead there were hush-hush negotiations - described as "quiet conversations".
"Consultation"? "Partners"? "Stakeholders"? Sure, no problem. Except on something vital which really matters.
But now, thanks to Bruce Grove councillor Stuart McNamara and the website WhatDoTheyKnow.com we can all take a peek into Haringey's top secret contacts with the DfE. I haven't yet been able to read through all five files. Here's the link.
__________
Incidentally, my partner Cllr Zena Brabazon got some of these documents in October last year. Zena tells me that every single copy email was stamped - in blood red - "Private & Confidential". As if we were in a John le Carré novel. And she was instructed: "that they should not be shared with any third party".
Mr Kevin Crompton, Haringey's Chief Executive and I subsequently exchanged several emails about councillors' "need to know". I pointed out to him the contempt shown - especially to councillors who represented wards with schools which at the time were potentially threatened.
(Tottenham Hale ward councillor)
Tags for Forum Posts: Department for Education, DfE, Haringey, John le Carré novel, Kevin Crompton, Michael Gove, clandestine, forced academies, quiet conversation, secrecy
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Clive Carter on
-
Alan, I can't comment on the English education system since its still largely a mystery to me even after years of residence in this country (the Scottish system, on which the NZ system is based, is more comprehendible to me).
But as for the contempt that some council "officers" hold for councillors – is there anything new in this?
I well remember 12 years ago that unelected (and quite unpleasant) council bosses concealed the fact that they were on the point of closing Stroud Green library. Specifically, they concealed this from my then Ward Councillor, Jose Irwin, who was merely the Deputy Leader of the Council. This piece of info about a matter in her Ward did leak out, fortunately. And Jose was cross.
(I am pleased to acknowledge that the council abandoned some time ago their earlier intention to close all branch libraries and in fact, the council is not closing any libraries – this is to their credit, especially in the current climate).
A few things may need to be concealed from the public. But until the Mafia-like code of Omerta – that operates generally in our local council – changes, we may not enjoy better governance.
-
Permalink Reply by Alan Stanton on
-
Let's not get too carried away, Clive. "Mafia-like code of Omertà - that operates generally in our local council." Well, hardly.
For a start, that would require a degree of effective and tightly-organised collaborative working across the organisation which neither of us believe exists - even for something as simple as reporting a dumped car-tyre.
The reality is both more variable and more optimistic. There are hundreds of Haringey staff who are more than willing to speak openly and frankly to councillors and residents and have a dialogue with them.
But unfortunately, at the top we have the bureaucrat's traditional "default position". I'm sure I've quoted Max Weber before now. "Every bureaucracy strives to increase the superiority of its position by keeping its knowledge and intentions secret. Bureaucratic administration always seeks to evade the light of the public as best it can, because in so doing it shields its knowledge and conduct from criticism…"
My comments about "contempt" apply to the failure of those involved in the secret discussions about our schools - officials from the DfE and Haringey - to properly inform councillors, including "cabinet" members; school governors; headteachers, parents, and staff, about what was happening.
Perhaps the saddest aspect is that - at least in Haringey - the people who decided on hole-in-the-corner secrecy probably did not intend to sell-out Haringey's schools. On the contrary, they were doing their utmost to make the best of a bad situation. They stupidly but genuinely thought their "quiet conversations" were in the interests of the schools. Well, as we now know, the road to Gove was paved with good intentions.
-
-
Please forgive me if I state the obvious, Mr Hoyle. But one reason to have elected councillors is precisely to speak up, ask questions and take the side of local residents. In the beautiful phrase used by Quakers (the Society of Friends): "To Speak Truth to Power.
The idea of the party system is for opposition parties to provide effective and vigorous alternative views which check and balance the power of the majority party. In addition, the Scrutiny Function is supposed to provide similar effective checks; balancing the power of Cabinet. I would like to say that both are very much the case. But that would not be truthful.
A last point. To be fair to Haringey staff, in my nearly 14 years on the Council, I have met a - thankfully very small - minority of councillors who have very much earned the contempt of officers. Even if the latter are usually too professional to show this.
-
Permalink Reply by JumpingtheWaves on
-
How can you compare secretive (and undoubtedly corrupt) negotiations over forced academies with issues such as Ally Pally and Wards Corner? I agree that the same principles generally apply (and people should rightly be angry over such issues) but the real, practical implications are vastly different. We're not talking about the selling off of public buildings and assets here, this is our children's education at stake, our children's future and the future of their children and children's children etc. In case it has escaped anyone's notice it's these same children who will be the future of our country and its democracy??? long after those of us posting on here have gone.
As a parent from Downhills School, which is currently faced with being forced to become an academy, I happen to think it's pretty important actually what negotiations have been going on behind closed doors and would question why they've not been more open. After all, who are the biggest stakeholders in our children and what happens to them? Is it Haringey LA, is it the DfE, is it Michael Gove and his business buddies? Our children are not 'public assets' and their future is not to be meddled with without full and proper consultation on the issues involved. At the same time, the school and its very considerable buildings and land are public assets and I don't see how the prospect of them being handed over to a private sponsor for 125 years should not be the concern of the community at large.
Whatever the differing opinions on academies are, it is the lack of say that myself and so many other parents (not just at Downhills, but the other 'forced academies' schools in Haringey and nationwide) are furious about! What really gets my goat is the way the government bangs on about the 'Big Society' and 'localism', with local parents supposedly having a voice - but only, it seems, if that 'voice' corresponds with Michael Gove's and buddy Wilshaw's own vision of the distopian future. So parents who want to set up Free Schools good, parents who protest against forced academies bad. The coalition's hypocrisy (let's not even mention greed) knows no bounds!
I have never met any parent who doesn't care about seeing their child's education and prospects improve (and this goes right across racial and cultural boundaries) but it seems to me that the current situation is as good an example of government having their cake and eating it as I've come across in a while. Just because we live in Tottenham, we're not a bunch of fools and the powers that be had best wake up to that.
-
-
Can you remind us what are special measures?
-
-
Omerta –
that would require a degree of effective and tightly-organised collaborative working across the organisation which neither of us believe exists - even for something as simple as reporting a dumped car-tyre.
No Alan, I don't beleive Council-Omerta would require such a degree of co-ordination. What it requires is a combination of formal and informal pressure. The formal pressure is the EXEMPT material and the documents with the 'blood red' restrictions that you well describe and the restrictions on talking to the press. The informal pressure is the background culture; the history of intimidation and the vindictiveness towards whistle-blowers, the threats of job and career damage etc.
We're not talking about issues like car tyre dumping or the little matters that the council is happy to consult on ad nauseum: we're talking about big issues, about which the council wants to consult on as little as possible.
There are many examples of information that is concealed by the council "officers" from elected councillors, or information that it is shared with councillors by council "officers" strictly on the basis that it remains concealed from electors and residents.
(I have before asked you when exactly council officers disclosed to you their plans to build over Down Lane Park and I accept that you couldn't remember exactly. However, I would guess it was late in the piece and not in the formative stages).
I believe this cuts across party political lines and I sometimes wonder if transitory councillors are there mainly as fig leafs for permanent staff and their agendas. I find this depressing, as I happen to believe in the value of elections of individuals to represent people.
I am most familiar with the case of Ally Pally, which I know bores you personally, but the council remains trustee. But IMO it is a prime example of how intense and obsessive secrecy (over the attempted sale) powerfully militates against the public interest. Indeed, that was what the High Court case was about.
A tiny toxic trio, comprising a manager, a legal advisor and a councillor, conspired in the biggest attempted rip-off of public assets in our Borough's history. It took much effort to expose this. I'm pleased to say there are a number of signs of improvement in AP matters, even if happening at a snails' pace.
Other major events involving intense secrecy that could be mentioned are the child protection scandals in recent years. I hear that little fundamental has changed.
It is clear to me that there are honourable staff at Haringey Council. It is a pity that what much of what passes for good governance has in recent years, depended on unofficial leaks from concerned staff members.
There are hundreds of Haringey staff who are more than willing to speak openly and frankly to councillors and residents and have a dialogue with them
I don't doubt this. And a few of them who have spoken out in this way have done so at cost to their jobs and careers. More might like to speak out, but don't for fear of repercussions.
And fear of speaking out is perhaps the biggest part of Omerta.
.
-
-
Clive, you've hi-jacked a thread about Freedom of Information and Mr Gove's forced Academies. And used it for some of your pet themes.
Can I suggest that you start a fresh thread on secrecy. And that the wise HoL admins move some of this there. I'm happy to debate secrecy and whistle-blowing. (But please, please not Ally Pally; the evils of Microsoft; and Oakfield Road Bridge.)
About Down Lane Park? Please don't perpetuate a myth. There was no conspiracy of silence or secrecy. It was cock-up.
As I've (wearily) explained before, Seamus Carey and I were welcomed into the Planning Office and they and we measured the dimensions of the park land. They'd got it wrong.
-
-
Billy that was my impression also. Despite the title of the original posting, my interpretation of the body was lent weight by Alan's commendable attempt at presenting an education issue (on which I'm unqualified to comment) in relatively neutral, impartial terms.
When I mention further examples of probably unjustified information non-disclosure or suppression, I'm accused of being a hijacker!
All of us, including the noble councillor, have "pet themes" but I do hope that Alan doesn't want debate solely on his own terms.
I feel I do have some knowledge about municipal information suppression. I will begin another thread as he's suggested.
-
-
It was cock-up.
Absolutely it was a cock up!
But was it not a cock up that involved a great deal of wasted time and money by council officers, who expended effort on developing plans to build over one third of Down Lane park, in part exchange for contaminated land?
Was not the main governance aspect of the cock up, that local councillors were made to look foolish and sheepish because these plans had been developed by council officers in isolation and without consultation – until they were beyond the formative stage?
The cock up was about more than mere mistaken measurements, that you suggest. I attended a FDLP meeting with Seamus on the huge development proposal and at that time at least, he wasn't as relaxed as you imply.
I appreciate why you would want to put a gloss on this, even though you weren't responsible. Just in case anyone else wants to perpetuate the "myth" of Down Lane Park, you might seek the removal of the FDLP web page, where the word used is not "dimensions" but "bombshell".
-
Permalink Reply by Neville Collins on
-
If anything, Haringey should be forced by the government to convert ALL remaining schools to academy status, and set up an independent body to replace the LEA, accountable to parents, and run by both parents and independents. We need to accept that the council is to blame for the poor performance of the borough's schools, and more must be done to improve the quality of childrens' education.
-
-
Neville I don't question your assertions; but what do you think about what I and at least one other, took to be the main thrust of Alan Stanton's post?
i.e. the secrecy surrounding this issue at the Council, especially the admonishments, from council "officers" (i.e. council employees) to councillors, to treat this issue as being little short of a matter of National Security.
When I offered other examples to support Alan's protests, he took fright and called me a hijacker. He claimed he was happy to debate secrecy and whistleblowing in a fresh thread, if only I'd start one!
Thus far, Alan's not commented on the very thread he suggested I begin ...
(NB. I'm not from this country and the idea of local councils controlling schooling has always struck me as odd, but that's just my immigrant perspective).
-
Permalink Reply by Seema Chandwani on
-
Neville, What do you feel academies offer to solve the problem of under performance? Where is the evidence of a compelling success rate of academies?
© 2024 Created by Hugh.
Powered by
