Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Yes Louisa and a good thing too. During the last Tory government when Mrs T was in the Labour LEAs use eduction as a political football as they had substantial autonomy. Therefore the LEA could withhold spending 'at the chalk face' and spend more at the Education department on admin and stuff that did not benefit our children. Teachers were in collusion with this as they are, in the main extreme, lefties.

It is totally unacceptable and one of the reasons why I loathe Labour and everything it has done to undermine the education of the working classes in the UK

Unclegen - I support free schools and academies - the creation of many different providers is a good thing. But forcing academisation on successful schools who dont' want it however, is ridiculous (and very unconservative, as you wish to make this, like everything, into a pro tory political rant). It's moving power and decision making away from local communities and schools in order to centralise power in Whitehall.

"Under current arrangements, when schools become academies they lease the land from local authorities. The new plans, however, will see all school land transferred directly to the education secretary, Nicky Morgan, who will then grant leases to academy trusts." http://www.theguardian.com/education/2016/apr/01/councils-decry-governments-academy-schools-land-grab


If you search a bit more, there are better articles for explaining the details, but this one is ok.


The land now held by local authorities would be handed over to the central government, and the possibility is that long leases (~100 yrs, similar to current local authority leases) to academies would effectively be a form of privatisation, as the land would be under private control (by an academy) for the rest of our own lifetimes, and a good chunk of our children's lives.

rahrahrah Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Unclegen - I support free schools and academies -

> the creation of many different providers is a good

> thing. But forcing academisation on successful

> schools who dont' want it however, is ridiculous

> (and very unconservative, as you wish to make

> this, like everything, into a pro tory political

> rant). It's moving power and decision making away

> from local communities and schools in order to

> centralise power in Whitehall.



I tend to agree with this. I'm in favour of academies but also choice - this feels overtly political to me. I think plenty of Conservative LAs think so too.

  • 2 weeks later...

Saffron Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Are they still going to enforce it on 'failing'

> schools? Soooooooo, just 'fail' most schools, and

> their Academy Plan more or less comes into play

> afterall? :-/


hhm - let's see. How to help fail a school and magically turn it into an Academy. I know let's make SATS harder!Huzzah!

Central government leasing land is neither a land grab or privatisation. I think the policy of forcing all schools to become academies was ridiculous but let's not rewrite reality



Over_the_Pond Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> "Under current arrangements, when schools become

> academies they lease the land from local

> authorities. The new plans, however, will see all

> school land transferred directly to the education

> secretary, Nicky Morgan, who will then grant

> leases to academy trusts."

> http://www.theguardian.com/education/2016/apr/01/c

> ouncils-decry-governments-academy-schools-land-gra

> b

>

> If you search a bit more, there are better

> articles for explaining the details, but this one

> is ok.

>

> The land now held by local authorities would be

> handed over to the central government, and the

> possibility is that long leases (~100 yrs, similar

> to current local authority leases) to academies

> would effectively be a form of privatisation, as

> the land would be under private control (by an

> academy) for the rest of our own lifetimes, and a

> good chunk of our children's lives.

It's not rewriting reality, though semantics may differ. It's a point of view that is as valid as any other in this mess. Furthermore, forced conversion to academies is still going to happen, just under a different guise.


So this "ridiculous" action, whether you define it as a land grab / privatisation or not, will still be enforced albeit under now rewritten terms, and it will still be ridiculous.

https://disidealist.wordpress.com/2016/05/06/when-is-a-u-turn-not-a-u-turn/

"Land grab", btw, is defined as a rapid, large-scale acquisition of property by a single entity or group of closely associated entities such as a government or associated companies, often under unfair terms and/or to exploit resources. It is often associated with water grabbing in developing countries, but it can be applied to any rapid, large-scale acquisition, particularly where control of resources is concerned.

As I read it the land is transferred to central government ownership .Then it can be leased by central gov to the Academy . And at the end of the lease central gov will own the land won't they ?


I'm not sure what term should be used to describe this action - taking land away from local authorities ?


I don't understand the comment that reality is being rewriten .

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • "That’s very insulting! You are basically calling 17 million people that voted to leave the EU ‘thick’. " I'm certainly calling them wrong. And many of those 17 million agree with me now and have expressed regret. Many others were indeed thick, and remain so. You can see them being interviewed all the time. As for insulting, the losing side in that referendum have being called every name under the sun "enemies of the people" etc etc - so spare me the tears about being insulted But for clarity. there is a certain type of individual who even now thinks Brexit was a good idea, tends to side with Trump and holds views about immigrants - and yes I am happy to calll those people thick. - and even worse Jazzer posts a long and sometimes correct post about the failings of modern parties. I myself think labour are woefully underperforming. But equally it has been less than a year after 14 years of mismanagement and despite some significant errors have largely steadied the ship. You only have to speak to other  countries to recognise the improvement there. They have cut NHS waiting times, and the upside of things like NI increases is higher minimum wage - something hard-bitten voters should appreciate. They were accused of being too gloomy when they came in and yet simultaneously people are accusing them of promising the earth and failing to deliver - both of those can't be true at the same time Fact is, this country repeatedly, over 15 years, voted for austerity and self-damaging policies like Brexit despite all warnings - this newish govt now have to pick up the pieces and there are no easy solutions. Voters say "we just want honest politicians" - ok, we have some bad news about the economy and the next few years  - "no no not that kind of honesty!!! - magic some solutions up now!" Anyone who considers voting for Reform because they don't represent existing parties and want "change" is being criminally negligent in ignoring their dog-whistles, their lack of diligence in vetting, their lack of attendance (in Westminster now and in eu parties is guises past) and basically making all of the same mistakes when they pushed for Brexit - basically, not serious people   "cost of things in the shops and utility bills keep on rising, the direct opposite of what they promised." - can we see that promise? I don't recall it? Because whatever voters or govts want, the cost of things is not exactly entirely in their gift. People were warned prices would rise with Brexit and e were told "we don't care - it's a price worth paying!". Turns out that isn' really true now is it - people DO care about the cost of things (and of course there are other factors - covid, trump, tariffs, wars etc.    What the country needs is a serious, mature electorate who take a high level view of priorities and get behind the hard work needed to achieve that. There is zero chance of that happening so we are doomed to repeat failures for years to come, complaining about everything and voting for policies which will make things worse
    • Regardless of “Blighty” it’s the combination of “we” “R” and “Blighty” we means there is a them  cancerian may or may not recognise a dog whistle.  If he doesn’t, we are trying to point one out.  If he does then they are trying to gaslight us into pretending they are just a lovely fundraising group with no agenda 
    • I’m on Darrell Road and have noticed this recently - your daughters are not alone! It seems to only be at night. Would you agree? High pitched and consistent. I’ve been wondering if it’s a street lamp, or a fox deterrent system.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...