Post Academies Act

Balls  reveals  line of attack


There are two very different views about what the Academies  Act will mean for Local Authorities and their future role . Michael Gove quoted Tony Blair when questioned in the Commons second Reading of the Bill (19 July) about the future role of Local authorities. Tony Blair had   said  “The best local authorities already increasingly see their primary role as championing parents and pupils rather than being a direct provider of education. We need to see every local authority moving from provider to commissioner, so that the system acquires a local dynamism responsive to the needs of their communities and open to change and new forms of school provision. This will liberate local authorities from too often feeling the need to defend the status quo, so that instead they become the champions of innovation and diversity, and the partner of local parents in driving continuous improvement.” Gove added “ That was Tony Blair in October 2005-once again, an unimprovable argument.”

Ed Balls claims though that  the Act  entirely removes the local authority’s role in such commissioning. Balls, when Education Secretary ,shifted the goalposts to ensure  that local authorities were more engaged in the Academies programme, including sponsoring Academies, not the original vision conceived by Lord Adonis.

He says  that  the Act   deprives schools with the biggest behaviour and special educational needs challenges of local authority support for special needs provision, the funding for which will go to those with the fewest such challenges; it permits selective schools to convert to Academy status, which risks the unplanned expansion of selective education; it removes any proper requirement to consult local authorities or the community before the creation of an Academy and centralises power in the hands of the Secretary of State over the future of thousands of schools without adequate provision for local accountability. He believes that  the role for the local authority in planning places, allocating capital or guaranteeing fairness or social cohesion is entirely removed. Balls believes that the Act does not extend  Labours Academy scheme  as the last Government ensured that academies were in the poorest communities and were turning around underperforming schools    … the coalition  Governments policy on the other hand  is about outstanding schools supporting only other outstanding schools-schools that are disproportionately in higher income areas with fewer children with disabilities or special educational needs. The reality, he said in the Second Reading,  is that this  legislation l gives extra resources to higher-performing schools in more affluent areas while at the same time removing any obligation for consultation with parents, local authorities or external sponsors. Balls pointed out that the only obligation on governors was to consult with those whom they thought ‘ appropriate’ .

Balls  is overstating the view that this will  lead to   the demise of local authorities role in education .

Authorities  don’t of course  run schools  but there are grounds for assuming that they will continue to have a significant schools  support role, if in  much leaner form  . You will find that most of the 20,000 Primary schools and a majority of Secondary schools  will  still rely heavily  on LA support.  153  schools are thought to  want to  convert by September although the process will take longer ie from an order being made to signing a funding agreement. More generally  there have been  1,900 expressions of interest, 862 have been from primary schools, and 529 of the 862 have been judged by Ofsted to be outstanding.

Academies and free schools will of course be free to shop around for  support services and this allows scope for LAs to compete with other suppliers. The Government has made it clear that, as part of the agreement between an Academy Trust and the Secretary of State the school must show that it  will  co-operate and collaborate  with other schools  in the area  . There are safeguards  too in place to protect SEN provision so Academies cannot simply opt out of their obligations to SEN pupils. Academies are required to participate in their local fair access protocols. Indeed,  as things stand,  Academies take a significantly higher proportion of children with SEN, than other maintained schools  .Clause 1(7) of the Bill, actually  strengthens the position of children with SEN and imposes on new academies all the obligations on admissions and exclusions that apply to maintained schools.

On exclusions Nick Gibb claims that Academies are less likely to exclude than other schools although others dispute this. What seems to happen in practice  is new Heads tend to exclude pupils when they take over a school but this settles down fairly quickly once they have imposed their new regime. The Government has also agreed to take into account how a new school impacts on other schools in the area, But Nick Gibb  is sensitive to any attempts to obstruct the establishment of free schools and he quoted Lord Adonis “The idea that parents should not be able to access new or additional school places in areas where the schools are not providing good quality places simply because the provision of those places will cause detriment to other schools fundamentally ignores the interests of parents and their right to have a decent quality school to send their children to. If there is not such a decent quality school and someone is prepared to do something substantive about it, they should be applauded”.-[ Official Report, House of Lords, 21 June 2010; Vol. 719, c. 1264.]

What is less clear, though is how the funding will work and the full implications to schools and LA funding. . Outstanding schools are being encouraged to become Academies and the best Local Authorities tend to  have the most outstanding schools. Clearly if these schools  opt out of LA control  then the Local authority will lose significant funding. But the worst authorities , those with the fewest outstanding schools, will not lose  nearly as much as the best authorities. That doesn’t seem to be very fair

Also, as one LA school improvement expert  pointed out to me it appears that Academies will  not be  charged for the vast number of DfE staff devoted to support  the Academies  programmes costs  in sustaining their  infrastructure including pensions etc. If this is the case then  surely the Academies leaving the respective  LAs should  now have to  pay for the central  Government overheads that  directly benefit them.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s