Stoke schools shock

The piece below appears in this week's edition of Tribune.

Stoke-on-Trent City Council, which was forced by the government to sub-contract its children's services to the private firm Serco, is looking to close all its secondary schools as part of a £200m reorganisation programme. The plans have been drawn up by Serco and are backed by Mark Meredith, the elected Mayor of the City and a keen supporter of the government’s policies on both Trust schools and academies. Indeed in a recent letter to the city’s school headteachers and chair of Governors Mr Meredith uses Lord Adonis type language when he describes the proposals as an attempt to ‘escape the straightjacket of the traditional comprehensive school and embrace the idea of genuinely independent non-fee paying state schools. It is to break down the barriers to new providers, to schools associating with outside sponsors, to the ability to start and expand schools; and to give parental choice its proper place.’



On its corporate website Serco proclaims that it is into ‘place shaping of communities’ (whatever that means), and that it is committed to ‘working with and across the whole local community to make citizens' lives better.’ It would appear that to date the ‘with’ part of that commitment has not been uppermost in its relations with the citizens of Stoke-on-Trent. Serco’s proposals have ignited an almighty row across the city. The local Labour party is opposed to the plans, as are the city’s three Labour MPs, as are the headteachers and teaching unions and as are the majority of parents and pupils. What angers and unites them is not whether there is a need for a debate about how the future education provision in the city should be shaped but rather the manner in which the debate and consultation has been handled by Serco and by the elected Mayor.

Appointed to run the city’s Children’s services in April 2007 on a three year contract, Serco produce a radical plan for the closure of all of the city’s secondary schools only two months later. No consultation with MPs or councillors about what the plans might look like, no opportunity for headteachers or the teaching unions to articulate an alternative vision, no attempt at a collegiate, collaborative approach that would set out how, together, the key stakeholders might meet the challenge of providing education excellence and equity for the young people of Stoke.

So if we have to have private contractors involved in the running of our education services at a local level we must surely insist that they are able to demonstrate that when being paid out of the public purse to provide a public service they promote community cohesion rather than create community discord.

Display: Sort:

Re: Stoke schools shock (#1)

Why do I get the feeling that this isn't as simple at Tribune is making out?

Re: Stoke schools shock (#2)

I used to live in Newcastle-under-Lyme which is next to Stoke, and is basically a suburb of the city.

Stoke is, in the nicest possible terms available, is a hole. Years of mismanagement from a Labour council and useless officers has led to the education system, along with most other services, to go into decline. The awful council lead to a people inspired referendum which brought an elected mayor to the city.

As for the elected members not being consulted, I doubt many of them actually would make any difference with their input. The citizens of Stoke should have been consulted however.

I'm thinking that Serco taking over may not necessarily be a bad thing. Stoke City Council couldn't run piss up in brewery, and a change certainly couldn't make anything worse. Let's just see how it goes.

 

 

Re: Stoke schools shock (#3)

After having a quick look around the web on this subject, it's clear that Serco were only brought because the Council was so dire.

As for "closing" - it seems that that only amounts to a schools reorganisation combined with Stokes BSF programme. A big change - but not necessarily a bad one. 

Re: Stoke schools shock (#4)

Oh, and it seems that the whole plan (or, more precisely, the four different proposals that the Council is considering)
is out at consultation at the moment.

Re: Stoke schools shock (#5)

As a resident of Stoke, and a Party member, perhaps I could present the truth, rather than the typical Tribune half-truth?

Yes Serco have been imposed on the council because the Directorate was deemed to be failing; it was only deemed thus because it had adult social services foisted onto education by an Independent Elected Mayor (Mike Wolfe) and a unelected Council Manager (Dr Ita O'Donovan), both now departed.

The plan is out for consultation; time will tell how serious the consultation is; however the three City MP's, Mark Fisher (Central), Rob Flello (South) and Joan Walley (North) have worked with the headteachers of the schools concerned to draw up an alternative plan, which has overwhelming backing.

As for the comment that Stoke is "a hole", the contributor obviously was blinded by the delights of Tory/Liberal Democrat controlled Newcastle-under-Lyme and missed the many great developments that are taking place under Elected Mayor Meredith and Labour Group Leader Mike Tappin.

Re: Stoke schools shock (#6)

Mike Tappin???? The guy who contested the Newcastle-under-Lyme selection in court and failed miserably. Is it also the same Mike Tappin who was placed low down on the list in the 1999 euro elections despite being a sitting MEP? You've got yourselves a real winner there.

As a Labour Party member, it is obvious to me that Stoke council, under Labour, has been run down. The evidence is that the BNP have been allowed to propagate, despite there being not sizeable ethnic minority population. Compare this to places like Dagenham, where there are real issues. Some of the people of Stoke are evidently really frustrated by the way things are run.

Stoke is a hole. I love the people, but the place has really been let down by Labour. Granted, I haven't lived in North Staffordshire for a while, and Meredith and Tapping might have done some good work, but they are working from a really low base.

 

 

Re: Stoke schools shock (#7)

Don't know about Tappin contesting Newcastle in court; was probably before my time - he was a County Councillor when I joined the Party.  As for being placed low down the Euro list, he was No 4 because women's quotas meant a woman was placed at 1 and 3, and the then-Leader of the EPLP was No 2.

I agree Labour in Stoke has not been as successful as it should have been, but in Stoke South at least the threat of the BNP is being addressed (and kudos to Searchlight for their help), and we actually took a seat back from them in May.

Tappin is certainly the most successful Group Leader I can remember - and Meredith's problem is that a sizeable chunk of the Labour Group refuse to work with him because they oppose the position of Elected Mayor in priniple; but together he and Tappin are beginning to move things in the right direction.

Re: Stoke schools shock (#8)

You are wrong about the European elections. There were 2 men (Cashman and Murphy) and 1 woman (Gill) elected in 1999 for Labour. So Tappin, despite being a sitting MEP, was booted.

Re: Stoke schools shock (#10)

The idea that the political lightweight that is Meredith is responsable for "many great developments" is perhaps one of the stupidist comments I have read on here for some time.

Reality time is this: he has been investigated for inappropiate use of office to give regional office pals expensive jobs, has lost his right hand man who has just been done in the courts for animal abuse, lost his political advisor by making a false claim of criminality that both the Council and the Police found without foundation, has done deals with BNP councillors, is still trying to pretend he will win a referendum on the mayoral system when ALL parties, including ours, is opposed to it in Stoke, is unpopular with the Labour Group, members, even the moderate ones, and now the schools....You heard it here first, Meredith is politically dead man walking.

Re: Stoke schools shock (#9)

There is a danger here of losing sight of the fact that the City is being given a £200 million education investment boost.  This is what is allowing the review to happen in the first place.  The City Council has taken the not unreasonable view that this is an once in a lifetime opportunity to start again and build an education provision in the City that is suitable for the 21st Century.  In this contaxt, the proposal to close all the existing schools and replace them all with new, and better situated, schools is a reasonable one.

Of course it was never the case that ALL the existing schools were sub-standard and clearly two or three are able to wage effective campaigns.  The Elected Mayor has recognised this (indeed given the pasting he has taken in recent weeks from parents and education staff he couldn't fail to!) and had said this fact will be taken into account.

I am baffled at the tone of the article above.  One would think that massive education cuts were being proposed (as in the Thatcherite eighties) not the huge improvement that is actually in prospect.

As a Party member in North Staffordshire, I know that Stoke has had its problems in the past, but the Labour Party has taken steps to raise its game.  Many Party members in the area viewed the election of Rob Flello in Stoke-on-Trent South and Mark Meredith to the Elected Mayor's position (both on the same day) as a substantial step forward for the Party.  At least now the problems facing the City are being properly addressed, albeit twenty years late, but it is inevitable that many people will find change difficult.

Despite the huge difficulties which the City still faces, we should be optimistic. In the words of Bono "I recognise forward movement when I see it!"

Re: Stoke schools shock (#11)

I'm sure that agency workers thought that Flello was the way forward when he talked out Paul Farrelly's (who is Flello's neighbour) agency workers bill.


They guy is a careerist and not what Stoke needs.

Re: Stoke schools shock (#12)

Just two points -

Firstly Serco were put in place not because our schools were failing (although the results are well below par) but because Children's services were in a bad state. Serco's entry to Stoke was to prevent harm coming to vulnerable children.

Secondly - on the Rob Flello issue. Call the man a careerist if you want but tell me which of the three Stoke MPs is doing the most to fight our most important enemy in the City - the BNP. Rob has forced the party in his constituency to confront the reasons why they are losing seats to the BNP and put huge amounts of energy into the fight against them. Can Joan and Mark honestly say they were out at 6.30am delivering polling day leaflets this year and the year before in a BNP dominated ward? In the ranks of doors knocked, phone calls made, and leaflets delivered I think you'll find Rob coming out on top. Equally why does no-one accuse former Arts Minister Mark Fisher of being careerist just because he no longer has a job in Government?

Re: Stoke schools shock (#13)

All kudos to him for delivering leaflets. Still doesn't do much for the agency workers he shafted, some of which are in his constituency. Quite frankly, a little more effort on behalf of Labour could easily crush the BNP in Stoke, but no one traditionally could be bothered. It's not like there's a big ethnic minority population there.

As for Mark, I can't see him buggering agency workers by talking out a bill (which incidentally, the idea behind was decided in the Warwick agreement), can you?  

 

Re: Stoke schools shock (#14)

"With a little more effort" - too right! There are wards in Stoke where it's considered to be the cutting edge of campaigning to deliver more than one leaflet a year. The use of any systematic method of contacting voters is patchy outside a few key wards. At one stage we held all 60 seats on Stoke Council and that led to complacency and that has led to our downfall. Labour has left a vacuum on the streets and the BNP have filled the vacuum.

On the agency workers - I'm sure there must have been something more to the talking out of that measure by a number of MPs than just opposition to rights for workers.  

Re: Stoke schools shock (#16)

Like what? I think Flello was made Hazel Blears PPS shortly afterwards, convenient that.

 

Re: Stoke schools shock (#15)

It is the spurious personal attacks on Rob Flello and Mark Meredith and the lack of focus on the voters and the problems facing the City which demonstrate to me, who amongst our politicans have got any idea which way the City needs to go.
If the City is going to attract inward investment, improve its infrastructure, create jobs and develop an education system fit for children in the 21st Century, then the petty faction fighting demonstrated above has got to stop.
We can have a debate about City Academies, and how they should be inaugurated, but I doubt that many parents will pass up the opportunity to send their kids to them as soon as they become available.  As has been already stated, all change is difficult, but we embrace it or get left behind by events.  Flello and Meredith seem to have grasped this fact, regardless of whatever other points of disagreement or criticism people may voice about them.  If they are the only two City level politicians prepared to lead this, so be it.  They deserve our support.

Re: Stoke schools shock (#17)

OK first the good news - the Serco plan has now been abandoned - almost certainly in favour of the Flello/Fisher/Walley plan, which they sold to Jim Knight (Schools Minister) earlier this week.

Now to address some of the points: Laurence, you're right about Tappin and the MEP's spot; I knew I was wrong about an hour after typing it, but it doesn't alter the fact that he was dropped in favour of someone who had never set foot in the West Midlands (apart from acting at the RSC), and who is never seen in North Staffordshire.

As for the Agency Workers Bill, I'm not sure if Rob Flello was made Hazel Blears' PPS before or after that speech, but if it was after then he was already PPS to Lord Falconer of Thoroton, so there was no real reward.  Whatever his motives for the speech the Government were going to talk it out anyway because Farrelly had reneged on a compromise earlier in the week.

It was mentioned that Mark Meredith had lost his "right-hand man" who had been convicted of animal cruelty; you're doing the individual Councillor more credit than he deserves by giving him the status of right-hand man; his successor is certainly far closer to the "centre of the action", although he will struggle to hold of the BNP next May.

As for Meredith campaigning for an Elected Mayor in next year's referendum, what source are you using?  All I've heard and read is that he has promised to live up to his manifesto commitment of holding a referendum, and hasn't expressed a preference for any option until the Democracy Commission has reported early next year.

Re: Stoke schools shock (#18)

So basically what you're are implying is that Tappin was so badly thought of that he was put lower down on the list than Michael. Ok, that sounds fair.

As for Michael never being in North Staffs, that is such a load of balls. What about him turning up to by-elections in Newcastle? And what about the substantial work he put in getting European match funding sorted out for a job shop in Stoke? Ask anybody from what was then CATU. 

As for Paul Farrelly reneging on a deal, that's crap and you know it. The whole deal was in the Warwick agreement anyway.

To work with Blears was clearly a promotion, since Falconer was living the government when Blair got in.