Peter Kent-Baguley

Community group gears up opposition to imposition of academies

A full scale debate on the debacle surrounding the re-structuring of secondary education in the City is due at Thursday's Full Council meeting. SERCO, the private profit-making company brought in by the Labour Elected Mayor (yes Labour!) to run the City's Children & Young People's department is universally seen to be aloof and arrogant in much the same way as the elected mayor is seen by the majority of the electorate. Now, we have the so-called Cabinet member/portflio holder for children and young people, Cllr Roger Ibbs, declaring on BBC Radio Stoke that it was the WHOLE Council which agreed the restructure. The response from a number of people who have known Cllr Ibb for a number of years have not been surprised since thye maintain his memory has always been somewhat selective. That's as it may be but he is certainly plaining wrong to say that Full Council ever agreed the school restructure: Full Council have been denied any opportunity to discuss it never mind agree it!

The stealth and secrecy, particularly around the imposition of 5 academies across the City, is further compounded by the local paper's refusal to carry a report of the one-day conference on academies held in the City on 13th September 2008. Silence is the biggest bias.

Well, never mind because grassroots organising is gaining momentum, with or without the local media reporting. Take a look at the excellent new site on academies prepared by community campaigners, HAVOC:

http://www.havocinstoke.org.uk/academiescomment.html

Any would-be sponsors of proposed academies in Stoke-on-Trent would do well to be a little cautious. They may well find that they will not be welcome once this hated undemocratic elected mayor system is thrown out in the 23rd October referendum.

Credit where credit's due...crunch!

Congratulations to the daily local paper for responding to my Bias Watch column launched on Wednesday. They had twice published brief descriptions of the elected mayor and cabinet and the council leader and cabinet systems which are the choices at the 23rd October referendum. Misleadingly, it stated the elected mayor would: employ a cabinet of advisers, whereas the council leader would: work with a cabinet of council members. The offending employ a cabinet of advisers has been replaced with: appoint a cabinet of council members. It was an important point because whichever system, mayor or leader, is chosen through the referendum, full executive authority is vested in the office of mayor or leader and therefore s/he appoints a cabinet of councillors.

Today's Sentinel focuses on the referendum by complaining about the 41 word referendum question. They know it's set by the government; they know the City Council can have no hand in changing it but still they go on to produce their own, reduced 17 word version. Great, but it won't make any difference to the question on the voting slip.

Agreed, the government's version is typical Whitehall civil servant speak. But thanks to Yes, Minister we are all much more familiar with such language! And anyway, surely defeated former councillor Paul Breeze, the self-appointed leader for the NO campaign, realises that by the time voters stagger to the polling booths beneath the welter and weight of a month's rantings from Breeze and his ilk, they'll have a pretty clear idea of the difference between a yes and a no vote.

By the way, interestingly, there is no trace of the Sentinel, Breeze or any of his ilk complaining about the even longer referendum question in 2002 when they were desperate to usher in the new dawn of local government. But then, that 43 word question mentioned the elected mayor and a yes vote was a vote for the mayor system. What an unmitigated disaster that's been for 6 years! With the experience of the grossly undemocratic mayor system, this time, the vast majority of people are feeling positive, intend to vote YES and look forward to being rid of the dictatorship of the elected mayor.

BIAS WATCH: Bias bashing bonanza

From now until the 23rd October referendum on the future form of governance for the City council there will undoubtedly be increasingly shrill cries of "bias" and even perhaps the occasional yell of "lies"! Much of the material will be garnered from the local daily newspaper and maybe the local BBC radio station. The local paper certainly hit the tracks in fine style yesterday. Within an eye-catching dotted box, usually indicative of a free coupon offer, the paper attempted to summarise the essence of each of the two options allowed by the government and thus point up the difference. No matter that they put the elected mayor and cabinet option first, and with two more lines than council leader and cabinet option next because we don't want this bias watch to become pettiness incarnate. No, the real subtle bias lies in describing the origins of the cabinets for the two systems.

For the elected mayor option: "He or she will ...employ a cabinet of advisers to help in the decision-making process."  What about the council leader option? "They (sic) will work with a cabinet of council members to decide on council policy and make decisions affecting the running of the city."

Curiously a single leader is referred to plurally as "they". Since supporters of the mayor and cabinet system seem to have a pathological hatred of the 60 democratically elected councillors they cannot even bring themselves to admit that the elected mayor "will work with a cabinet of council members"! It would serve the local paper right if it were flooded with requests about the employment conditions for the mayor's cabinet and how the application forms for the advisers jobs will be made available!

The Guardian's In praise of...Tribune

Possibly for the first time ever, I didn't read the current issue of Tribune until last night, having first seen with enormous delight the Guardian's answer to those splendid Third Leaders of The Times (when it was The Times), In praise of... focusing on Tribune. Its penutlimate sentence: "It was Labour's beating heart." sounded decidedly final, rending the praise rather more an obituary.

I had been so wrapped up with the anti-academies conference in the city on Saturday and all kinds of follow up work on Sunday that my weekly dose of Tribune was on hold. That penultimate sentence thrust shock waves through me and I immediately retrieved my current Tribune and rather frantically flicked pages searching fro the dreadful announcment. And there it was, a note at the end of the Comment column, headed: URGENT talks are taking place about the future of Tribune. 

Apparently the trade union consortium which owns Tribune - Unite, Unison, Community, ASLEF and the CWU - has still not agreed a  financial development plan tabled in April. The delay has led to "financial strains" so the Tribune Board has agreed to seek a broader range of investment from within the labour movement. The matter will now be discussed at the annual meteing of the Trade Union and Labour Party Liaison Organisation in Manchester on Friday 19th September.

Come on for goodness sake tade unions: this is not the time to abandon an important voice for labour that is neither strident nor hectoring, but thoughtful and encouraging, encompassing a broad range of labour centre-left views. If you are a member of one of the Tribune-owning trade unions, make sure your general secretary knows you expect support to be given to Tribune.  

You can change your mind now that you know you can adopt

Local councils need to act immediately to save the celebrated, iconic K6 red telephone kiosks within their boundaries. Designed by Sir Giles Gilbert Scott to mark George V's silver jubilee, the much-loved red telephone kiosk first appeared in 1936. It was the king's wish that every city, town, village and hamlet should have one. Within a few years some 70,000 graced urban and rural landscapes throughout the UK.

With the privatisation of the GPO in 1984 and the establishment of BT, successive culls have reduced the total to 12,747.* Of those, 2,798 are listed and cannot, it would seem, under existing legislation be removed. English Heritage have a further 48 pending listing.  5,282 are not under threat in BT's current proposal to re-align payphone provision - a rather prosaic phrase for removal.

That leaves 4,619 threatened with removal. At the end of August, near the end of the original consultation period, BT introduced a radically new initiative in response to the widespread dismay over the possible loss of more than a third of all red K6 kiosks.

K6 in the Debyshire village of Warslow

At the meeting hosted by English Heritage in London on September 9^th I made a very strong plea to BT to extend their deadline of October 1^st by which local councils must respond to their latest initiative. I emphasised that local government processes, particularly in non-unitary authorities, required more time to simply accommodate the cycle of meetings. I was strongly supported by Tom Oliver, representing CPRE. 

BT have responded positively and extended their cut-off date to 1^st November.

A number of councils had already responded to BT, and as a result the demise of nearly 2,000 K6s was agreed. Fortunately, the new initiative enables councils to either ADOPT or SPONSOR the K6s within their area even those they may have agreed to be removed.

To adopt means that the council would assume ownership for a nominal fee of £1 and therefore responsibility for the kiosk. The telephone equipment would be removed but the iconic K6 would remain in situ and continue to be an integral part of the landscape. To sponsor, the kiosk remains fully functioning and in the ownership of BT but the council would pay £500 annually, 50% of BT's stated £1,000 annual maintenance cost.

Both options are succinctly and simply explained, along with a specimen contract, at: www.payphones.btcom/adopt_a_kiosk and an application form to register the council's wish to adopt/sponsor without final commitment. Registration is a vital way of guaranteeing K6s will not be removed if adoption or sponsorship is agreed.

Remember, if your council has already conceded removal, this new initiative means a potential reprieve: you can change your mind now that you know you can adopt. Let's all make sure we do not lose any more of the beautifully designed red K6s.

Special Full Council votes for referendum

At last, the long await referendum to decide the future system of governance after the present debacle of a democratic sham is buried next May has been agreed. Two thirds of the Council voted in favour of the council leader elected by Full Council and cabinet system, thus triggering a referendum. The fall-back position is directly elected mayor and cabinet system if the majority in the referendum reject leader and cabinet. So, in the referendum, to be held on THURSDAY 23rd OCTOBER 2008, a YES vote is for leader and cabinet and a NO vote is for mayor and cabinet. As a member of the all-party and no-party DEMOCRACY4STOKE campaign along with dozens of fellow activists, next week we hit the streets of all 20 wards as well as the centres of all six towns with our first wave of publicity. We shall be spelling out very clearly the democratic, economic, social and political advantages of the leader and cabinet system.

At last there is light at the end of an increasingly dark tunnel where decision-making is steaped in stealth and secrey: a far cry f rom the aspiration at the core of the 2000 Local Government Act which claimed the change to Executive arrangements would enhance transparency, eficiency and effectiveness. Well, certainly that has not been the case since 2002 in Stoke-on-Trent with an elected mayor!

Democracy in action : engaging the people

Calling all parents, teachers, councillors, governors...in fact all conerned people

Both SERCO director of education, Ged Rowney and Labour elected mayor, Mark Meredith, have refused the chance to defend their proposed imposition of 5 academies on the City. Meredith denied the City Council the opportunity to debate academies. Instead, claiming it was an executive decision matter, he and the council manager resolved to impose academies on communities who want to retain community schools! Yet, Meredith, echoing the hollow chant of government's insane dash for academies, claims they somehow, mysteriously provide parents with more choice! Meredith's problem is that he knows little about education and understands even less! Where is the educational research that relates forms of governance of schools with the academic, sporting and social success of schools? The sad fact is that half of the existing academies were in Ed Balls' list of 638 failing schools!

After I failed to overturn the decision to create 5 academies at the Overview and Scrutiny meeting earlier this year, I made a public pledge that I would ensure a public debate would be organised. Working as part of the Stoke-against-academies group I have brought together respected academics with extensive research experience on education and employment, anti-academy councillors from Barrow-in-Furness and teachers on a platform that should inform and encourage discussion...and most importantly, action. Communities that wish to retain a community school deserve all possible support to resist the imposition of undemocratic, alien managed academies, divorced from the state education system and designed only to serve the pet interests of their sponsors at the consierable expense of the taxpayers.

Come and join the debate: this Saturday, 13th September 2008. FORUM THEATRE, Potteries Museum & Art Gallery, Bethesda Street, Hanley. registration 10am - 10.20am. Sessions throughout the day until 3.15pm with an hour for lunch. If you can't make the whole day, dip in whenever its convenient. You will be welcome. This day is designed to be an example of democracy in action : engaging the people. Try not to miss!  

Staffordshire Gardens & Parks Trust

Along with fellow Heritage Champions from neighbouring Newcastle-under-Lyme, Lichfield and Tamworth I was one of the hundred or so guests of the Trust's reception held this evening at the splendid C18th brick Chillington Hall (amazingly only 7 miles from the centre of Wolverhampton) with the most well proportioned portico with four elegant stone columns dominating the south front. Before the presentations and buffet reception in the recently refurbished saloon (we were the first group to grace it) a few of us (the intrepid) were not put off by the heavy rain and sallied forth beneath the tarpaulin covered trailer towed by tractor along the watercourse, through well conserved woodland and to the 70 acre lake with several magnificent follies along its shores.

The land and the various houses that have stood at its centre during the past 800 years have remained in the Giffard family for all those centuries. The present Giffard is the 29th owner and he's the former Chief Constable of Staffordshire, John Giffard. He gave a a very clear, succinct overview of the task of preserving the 4,000 acre estate and the present hall, first built in 1724 and later enlarged in 1785 by the celebrated architect, Sir John Soane.

Alan Taylor, founder and past chair of the county's Gardens & Parks Trust was instrumental in its establishment in 1992. It has only 100 or so members but it has achieved a great deal in a relatively short time with so few members. A great deal of research and practical work has been accomplished at numerous parks and gardens throughout Staffordshire. A huge amount of work remains to be done and so the window on their work, neatly presented by Alan will, I hope, lead to a boost in their membership. At £10 per year, it is incredibly good value. Contact W.B. Sullivan of Rugely (01543 684965) for more details. 

Lord Mayor celebrates Bhs' FAIRTRADE coffee

This afternoon, the Lord Mayor, Cllr Derek Capey, the Lady Mayoress and Ann Worthington, secretary of the City's Fairtrade group, enjoyed a mug of FAIRTRADE coffee as guests of the Bhs restaurant in Hanley. As partron of the Stoke-on-Trent Fairtrade group, the Lord Mayor was there to congratulate British Home Stores for their move to the exclusive use of FAIRTRADE coffee in its store restaurant. Faitrade tea and sugar are in the pipeline.

Like its neighbour, Marks & Spencer, that has used only FAIRTRADE tea, coffee and sugar in their store Cafes for several years now, Bhs has joined a growing band of national chain retailers, as well as local independent retailers, in their support of a better deal for producers in Third World countries.

The Lord Mayor and Lady Mayoress are committed Fairtrade shoppers. They firmly believe that an ethical approach to our shopping, our consumption, is fundamentally important because we should not enjoy the basic things of life at the expense of other peoples' lives.

And in a nutshell, that is what FAIRTRADE guarantees: a better deal. Better medical care, better education, better housing. For millions of people, it is even, literally, the difference between life and death.

We can, each of us, in our shopping, make the difference, simply by buying goods with the FAIRTRADE logo.  

Many people still worry that only a small amount of the price we pay for FAIRTRADE goods reaches the producers. The price we pay has nothing at all to do with what the producers receive. The producers price is agreed at the beginning of the production process. It is always above the prevailing market price, and in the case of tea, coffee and sugar, for example, usually considerably above the depressed world commodity market prices. Producers therefore know at the outset what they will be paid. It is guaranteed and often in part paid in advance to help with cash flow. Furthermore, the deal lasts for several years, thus giving the producers much needed stability.

So, whether your cup of tea or coffee costs £1 or £10 (let's hope not though!) remember, that price reflects the amount of profit the retailer is making NOT the amount being paid to the producers.

APPEAL TO ALL COUNCILS TO ADOPT or SPONSOR K6 RED TELEPHONE KIOSKS IN THEIR AREA 

LATEST NEWS FROM BT

In their letter received today, addressed to senior conservation officers, BT write: "We are pleased to announce that we can offer communities the opportunity to retain their kiosks thereby ensuring that these icons can, where requested, continue to form a focal part of a community."

BT have come up with two options. ADOPT a Kiosk. Local councils may take ownership of the K6 free of charge, ensuring that the kiosk, minus the payphone equipment, is retained in situ for generations to come.

Or, the Sponsored Kiosk programme is available for those councils which wish to contribute towards the ongoing costs of maintaining the K6 with the payphone equipment fully functioning. Full details may be found online at: www.bt.com/payphones

Adopt or Sponsor options apply to all K6 red telephone kiosks. It is essential that local councils act quickly. Applications for either adopt or sponsor should be submitted to BT not later than 1st October 2008.

Retainng a valuable aspect of our architectural heritage is now in the hands of local councils. 

In advance of the meeting with BT in London on 9th September, English Heritage, the LGA, CPRE (Campaign to Preserve Rural England) and other attendees have received a very welcome, positive message from BT. In response to my letter to Sir Michael Rake, BT chairman, I have been assured: "...we are considering the proposal of allowing local councils to retain and assume ownership of red kiosks, where they are considered to enhance their setting. We are currently progressing the aspects of this proposal that we will need to discuss with Ofcom and English Heritage. Please be assured that we are reviewing this with some urgency and I can confirm that, in the meantime, BT will not remove any red kiosk where there is a request by the Unitary Authority to keep it, until we have fully examined these proposals." 

So far so good! Congratulations to BT for responding so positively, and quickly, to calls for retention of the classic K6 red kiosks in situ.