Outstanding for All - Haringey Education Commission Report - February 2013

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Alan Stanton on February 17, 2013 at 1:46

Thanks to Karen for linking to this report.  I think though it needs a bit more critical comment and not simply listing the main issues.

Can I also clarify the statement that the Commission was set up by Haringey Council. In fact it was purely a decision taken on her own by Cllr Claire Kober the Council "Leader". She set the terms of reference of the Commission and chose who she invited onto it. As far as I can discover Cllr Kober didn't even consult Cllr Lorna Reith the "Cabinet" member for Children's Services at the time. Cllr Kober was solely responsible for committing the funds spent (£16,813.93 which incidentally, does not appear to include an estimate for Council officer time involved.)

I made a Freedom of Information Act request about the Commission and was informed that there was no legal requirement for Cllr Kober to get "Cabinet" or Council agreement for her decision. Cllr Kober didn't bother to do so and perhaps this is indeed the legal position. Nor was her unilateral action discussed by, or agreed by, the majority Labour Group of councillors.

To my mind it is contemptible for Cllr Kober to ignore and sweep aside any democratic process and accountability. Cllr Kober's contemptuous process continued until after the report was delivered to her by the Commission. It seems that only Labour councillors were sent copies - and that was not until the day before. I checked with a few LibDem councillors and by 2.30 pm on 14 February - after the Commission Report was launched - the LibDems had not had the courtesy of getting a copy. (With the exception of councillors who were chairs of school governing bodies).

So there was no respect for the rights of the minority parties. (Nor perhaps the two independent councillors.) The rules of proportionality, of equalities and even basic courtesies could it seems, all be jettisoned by one unaccountable person claiming to speak for the whole Council. Despite the fact that the Council had had no opportunity to read or discuss or vote on setting up the Commission; nor to comment a draft of the report.

Indeed, Cllr Kober explicitly made such a claim to speak on everyone's behalf at the launch of the Commission Report. (Please see the the attached file.) The notes for her speech contain the pronoun "I" some 38 times. It is the speech of someone full of her own power and puffed-up self importance.

Although in Haringey there was a clear rejection of having a mayor, we seem to have stumbled by accident into having a completely undemocratic "faux mayor" who believes it is okay for her to act without any checks and balances. I wonder what Cllr Kober would have said had a LibDem Leader behaved in this way. I would hope that a Labour Leader worthy of the name would have led loud protests. 

I gather that there are now steps being taken to get retrospective approval by the Labour Majority Group and to have the Commission Report endorsed by the full Council. Given that Labour councillors will shortly be seeking reselection by the Party for next year's election, I doubt that Cllr Kober will have a problem getting supine acceptance.

As Cllr Karen Alexander rightly says, the Report is highly critical of Haringey's record in supporting our schools. In other words, Cllr Kober's Commission has exploded in her face.

But as we know, the Kober regime is all about spin, "narrative" and PR with little substance. So it's fascinating to see the masterly way it's spun in her speech. Reading it, you could almost believe the Commission was reporting her own triumph. And while Cllr Kober accepts that the Commission has set out serious problems and urgent tasks, you will nowhere find acceptance of responsibility by her - the woman who has led Haringey for 4½ years.

Despite the fact that she has been engaged in steadily centralising her own power and handpicking loyal cronies for jobs, the problems are 'spun' as everyone else's fault except hers.

One consequence of the faulty process operated by Cllr Kober is that the Report contains a number of errors which could and should have been corrected had the Commission stuck to its original plan and issued an Interim Report. There are also some worrying recommendations which, if taken at face value, constitute a headteachers' charter. It does not appear to give sufficient weight to the vital importance of checks and balances in the governance of schools - as in every other type of organisation.

Plainly, judging by the unrelieved arrogance and incompetence of Cllr Kober, she is utterly clueless about this issue.

(Tottenham Hale ward councillor)

Attachments:

• EducationCommissionLaunch.doc, 37 KB

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Clive Carter on February 17, 2013 at 7:56

Alan I have read your comment above and confess to being perplexed.

Rather than deal with the serious issues raised in the report, you seem to use the report as an excuse to attack the person who commissioned it (AKA shooting the messenger). But on this occasion, I do not think your motive is wholly as a distraction technique.

I would imagine that it is within the leader's purview to commission such a report: and on an important topic, no? This does seem to be an example of leadership.*

You are right of course that all councilors should be treated equally as regards the timing of distribution of the report, but this is a minor aspect when compared to the subject matter. Deciding to commission an independent report on this subject is surely commendable rather than "contemptible".

I have no special knowledge about education in the Borough but is my general impression, that in some parts of the Borough, standards are not high enough. If low expectations of children in the home are matched by low expectations by teachers, it shouldn't surprise anyone that outcomes aren't what they should be. IMO, the need to educate children properly should trump the needs of teachers' unions in every case. Improving education is a long term task.

Am I wrong to believe that your motivation is a defence of poor teaching standards?

----
On leadership

* a better example of someone going off and doing their own thing without needed consultation, was Cllr Reith's unilateral distortion and corruption of Haringey's logo. It was wasteful, unnecessary and the result is ugly. My understanding is that Cllr Reith consulted no one.

By contrast, an example of real leadership was the decision of council officer Julie Parker to launch an independent inquiry into the Firoka Licence. Cllr. Adje - later suspended - complained about not being consulted (he also incredibly claimed not to have known who commissioned it). The lesson is surely that the extent of consultation depends on circumstances.

There is too much spin and PR in the council and for all I know, the council leader may be arrogant and incompetent. However, deciding to commission an independent report on education – where Haringey schools have before now been taken into Special Measures – surely cannot and should not be cited as an example of same.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Alan Stanton on February 17, 2013 at 13:09

I'm perplexed, Clive, that you find the issue of local democracy a "distraction". And your speculation that my "motivation is a defence of poor teaching standards"  would be insulting if it wasn't absurd.

But you're right that my comments focussed on Claire Kober and the process of setting up this Commission. This was because the Commission was solely Claire Kober's idea and her project.

Now, I agree with you that there's nothing wrong with a Council Leader bringing in outside views. But not to abdicate her responsibility for nine months while waiting for a Commission to tell her what to do about urgent and pressing issues.

There's a saying I'm rather fond of: "How you do it is what you get".  And the process of setting up the Commission could have been far better. It's helpful and sound practice for a Leader to chew over ideas with cabinet colleagues. (And I don't mean reporting a done deal.) And also within her Party Group and with Opposition Party councillors. In this case some discussion with local headteachers, teachers representatives etc. could have been valuable. Which could have been done informally and reasonably speedily - weeks, not months.

You're right that I haven't yet properly covered the issues raised by the Commission and its recommendations. I posted my comment at 2am and needed to sleep. So more to come.

Although in one sense, as the Dear Leader has already proclaimed the Council's official response, and doesn't listen to dissent, why should anyone bother thinking for themselves? In fact, to save money why not dispense with councillors, elections and all that stuff.  Here's an online substitute Cllr Kober might prefer.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Old-Age-Emporium(OAE) on February 17, 2013 at 13:31

At the end of a week which saw the (allegedly) voluntary resignation (first in eight centuries) of the Dear Leader of an organisation almost as uncollegial and autocratic as Haringey Council, isn't it time to prepare a hermitage among the caves of Muswell Hill for the Kober Popess?

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Seema Chandwani on February 18, 2013 at 19:27

Mesdames? Willy, I think you meant 'Queen' ... LooooL!

As for the rest of your view, it may surprise you that I actually agree with you. An independent report is what was needed as I dont trust the 'conflict of interest' that occurs when people investigate themselves and are expected to be objective. However, a report remit needs to look at the right things to report on the right things

But it is not the report that will give change, it is the implementation of those action plans. Who will that be? If again it has to be an independent, outside body... when we will question the return on investment of salaries of directors/deputy directors (who have their PAs email a response to you). Are they just going to be sitting there? 

Anyway, distracting the point.... This is about children and young people, most of whom have no idea this report exists and have not had/given their responses to it yet. 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Seema Chandwani on February 19, 2013 at 16:33

I never said that Willy.... Why can you not debate without twisting an arguement? Have faith in yourself, its cringing

What I said was IF an outside body comes in to implement, this brings into the question what the management in the council are being paid for. 

As for "Return on Investment" this is not an analogy, its basic (yes basic as in simple to understand) management. You pay someone to do a job, it is sensible to question what you are getting back for that pay. 

Anyway, you're boring me now.... bye! 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by 08iguxnrlhz9e on February 23, 2013 at 16:32

http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/haringeys_education

Attached the link to your Freedom of Information Request with Haringey Council's responses to your initial request and your follow up queries.

I hope this helps

Haringey resident 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Clive Carter on February 23, 2013 at 17:40

Thanks for the link Marlene.

I've often been critical of some council spending.

The £180,000 spent by the council on a PR company (Lexington) in pursuit of selling off our charity's main asset (Ally Pally) was a complete waste of money, but a small fraction of the total wasted.

By contrast, the circa £100,000 (incl. VAT) spent on the three Walklate investigations –  into the Licence-to-Firoka, on the Charitable Trust's General Manager K. Holder (also trading as Edwin Holder Associates) and on Cllr. Adje – was money well spent, especially if all the lessons are learnt.

By the same token, if the Haringey Education Commission's Report cost £10,000,000 (which it did not) and if, as a result, all the lessons are learnt and children's education is put first above all vested interests in the education industry, that too would be cheap at the price and money well spent.

Report below:

Attachments:

• Oustanding-for-all-report-FINAL.pdf, 1.6 MB

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Seema Chandwani on February 17, 2013 at 16:35

This debate is getting so messy... 

I skimmed the report on the morning of the launch, looking predominately at the recommendations and was disappointed. I did end up reading the whole report later that evening and the disappointment grew. That said, much of the report said a lot of what many of us already knew considering the angle the report chose to take, whether the actual recommendations will go anywhere to rectify those findings is where I am less convinced and even more unconvinced the findings itself have identified the failings that need rectifying. However, I have my own insight, thoughts, professional knowledge and understanding that leads me to think that. 

I appreciate the report has now given the Lib Dems an opportunity to rub their hands with glee (not saying you are Karen - to be fair to you, I acknowledge you have refrained from doing so and that in my eyes is something I think you deserve respect for) and no doubt Mark Pack, (the Lib Dem/Lynne Featherstone PR Guru) hasnt stopped orgasming since its release. Therefore, on a politically strategic level, it may not have been the smartest move to 'air your dirty laundry in public' not because of point scoring, but it removes the focus and has now become a political weapon.

Whilst I love a political debate, and am guilty of Lib Dem bashing on a variety of issues, using children and young peoples education is not something I am prepared to do - it is way too important to be trivalised. 

Alan, I am on HoL as you sent me the link to this debate following our private exchanges about me not being too happy with the reaction since the release of this report. I assumed I would have read something that would enhance that conversation, but as it hasnt I'll respond to you in private on why I have expressed me not being too happy. 

S 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Karen Alexander on February 17, 2013 at 17:33

Believe it or not I put this post up to inform residents (its one of the things that local councillors should be doing, after all, I am the community's representative in the council not the council's representative in the community (at least that's how I see it)) - you will note that I made no comments or my own thoughts but I do think that is in the public interest.

I too read the report with great disappointment and as Seema quite rightly points out the report told us a lot of what we already know.    It was a report that needed to be commissioned and hopefully now we can all move forward to address the issues that have blighted education in Haringey over many years.

Seema, you do the libdems, Mark Pack, Lynne Featherstone etc etc a real disservice when you say they are rubbing their hands in glee.  Nobody in their right mind would want to see the education system in this borough in such a dire state and everyone, of all political persuasions, are working hard here in Haringey because they want to make a difference and improve the lives of local people, that's what I got into local politics for!  I have have two school-age children so I am well aware of the difficult choices parents here have to make when it comes to Haringey's state schools. We have many friends who have either moved out of London or gone down the private education route because many perceive they have no choice because of the standard of education here in Haringey - I find that incredibly sad.  That said I also acknowledge that great progress has been made - but not enough and too slowly.

There will always be a political element but if this report marks the start of real progress in making our schools the best in London then I for one will be delighted.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Seema Chandwani on February 17, 2013 at 18:01

Hi Karen

Without myself getting into the political debate, the tweets from Lynne Featherstone and Cllr Neil Williams (which was retweeted by Cllr Wilson) did the whole "Its all Labours fault" crap! This cheap level of politics when it comes to children and young people annoys me. 

Many of the general public may not understand our local gov political structures, but I do. The Lib Dem Cllrs also get paid an allowance from taxpayers to do a job in running our council. All of the pantomine/tweet orgies happens outside of that payment (one hopes). 

Within the remit of what is paid for by taxpayers is democratic opposition, the Lib Dems sit on numerous committees, including the Children and Young People's Scrutiny Panel which oversees education standards and is actually chaired by Cllr Newton a Lib Dem. 

There are powers both parties in Haringey had/has to call into account the processes and practices of council officers and affect change, esp if this report is telling us what we already know. 

No roses or yellow birds can proclaim victory here.

Again, I am not saying you are and retain my comments that on my observation, I have respected you for not engaging in such statements 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Clive Carter on February 18, 2013 at 7:31

Seema it's disappointing that you see this important report largely through the prism of party politics. i.e. is this publication good for my party or is it bad for my party?

Therefore, on a politically strategic level, it may not have been the smartest move to 'air your dirty laundry in public' not because of point scoring, but it removes the focus and has now become a political weapon.

Sadly, this is the excuse and mindset behind the reflexive secrecy that prevails at our council. There are glimpses of change in this regard, and I'm pleased to acknowledge that the council committee that governs our charity Alexandra Palace has seen improvement, despite the domination of that committee by the council majority group (these advances only followed the High Court defeat in 2007).

Does the intensely party political outlook have anything to do with the fact that there's been one party in power for the past 40 years and as a result, this Borough is amongst the most politicised in the land? Should political parties be an end in themselves, or a means to an end? Are they not supposed to compete to run the place best for residents and in this case, residents' children?

Certainly there appear to be elements of the majority group who regret the report's publication and even its commissioning in the first place. And should it be surprising that in a democracy, a competing party would draw attention to this report?

No party is or should be "rubbing its hands with glee" over conditions that could blight children's lives. I hope that on reflection you might regret that phrasing.  All of us wish that things were genuinely better in Haringey and, that that aspiration was not confined to the infantile Better Haringey slogan. So often, failures are covered by PR, denial, distraction or – attack on other parties.

It is not good enough.

The first and last consideration here ought to be children's education – regardless of anything else and least of all, regarding of party dis/advantage. Schools do not exist for the benefit of teachers. They're to educate the next generation and everything else should be subsidiary to that. A culture of low expectations needs to change and it needs to mean more than empty slogans like "Better Haringey".

(A Haringey teacher once told me that this was one of the official aims, printed on a card and issued to teachers. Such an infantile slogan is beneath primary school children and yet this meaningless phrase was intended as a guide for teachers. At least one teacher felt insulted. Haringey cannot fail to achieve a Better Haringey because it is an empty, worthless, untestable, unfalsifiable proposition.)

I may now understand a probable reason why the council leader commissioned an independent report and allegedly failed to consult on commissioning it. And it reflects credit on her.

It is an indictment of the way things were run that the Borough's schools were ever taken into Special Measures. Nothing should stand in the way of improving education of the Borough's children, not the representatives of vested interests and least of all, partisan politics. There are obstacles to progress and some appear to have been identified in the report.

Especially for the children of illiterate or poorly educated parents, schooling normally represents the one chance at providing real choices in life. It's a bigger idea than party advantage.

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• Next ›
• Page