NUT conference:
Kick big business out of education!
DELEGATES TO the National Union of Teachers (NUT) annual conference
faced up to how to fight the biggest proposed upheaval to the education
system for over 60 years.
Ken Smith
New Labour’s Education and Inspections Bill aims to overturn the idea
of comprehensive education and allow the ‘free market’ and big business
to let rip in the education system. It plans to take schools out of
local authority control and hand the most lucrative parts over to big
business and religious organisations.
As well as preparing the way for a two-tier or three-tier education
system, they are also opening up the way to corruption in education
provision – see the ‘cash for honours’ scandal over sponsorship of
academies.
Lewisham delegate and Socialist Party member Martin Powell-Davies,
speaking to the main Left amendment in the debate on how to oppose the
Bill, warned that the attacks it contains are part of "a divisive
neo-liberal ideology that believes that market competition and
privatisation improves services which they patently don’t… they are
part of a wider attack on public services."
Education Bill
Martin warned that the NUT leadership’s proposals were not enough to
win this struggle. He pointed out that with this government "strength of
argument is not enough – they’re happy to lose the argument but press
ahead in any case."
Martin added: "There is no educational argument for the Education
Bill but unless we fight back it will happen anyway". With the break-up
of local authority schools and the "dog-eat-dog admissions system" there
will be a huge threat to teachers’ jobs, pay and conditions.
He concluded that although it may be necessary to fight school by
school in some cases, the most effective action would be across schools,
with a campaign for national strike action. Martin argued for the
linking up with other public-sector workers who are also considering
action against privatisation, to ensure an effective fight before the
Bill becomes law.
Former NUT president Mary Compton showed how the Labour government’s
plans were part of an international campaign by big business and
financial capital to make rich pickings out of education. She referred
the conference to a World Bank document "Education – the last frontier
for profit" which was part of a worldwide plan to end free education and
which chillingly warned of how "the political power of teachers’ unions
can be countered."
National executive member Hazel Danson pointed out that although only
7% of education in Britain was currently in private hands, 17% of the
Parliamentary Labour Party had received a private education. 25% of
junior ministers, 40% of the Cabinet and 100% of those making decisions
on the future of education had received a private education.
The conference agreed a resolution, strengthened up by the Left
amendment, that prepared a campaign that could build for strike action.
One immediate aim will be to build for a huge lobby of Parliament,
possibly alongside other public-sector unions fighting privatisation.
Pensions
OTHER KEY debates at the conference were over pensions and the
anti-union laws.
The successful united public-sector union pensions’ struggle that
forced the government to retreat from its plans to raise the retirement
age for existing public-sector workers clearly gave NUT delegates
confidence that the government plans for ‘reforming’ education could be
driven back.
Speaking against an executive amendment, which wanted delegates to
accept on trust what the union leadership was in the process of
negotiating on the new teachers’ pension scheme, Martin Powell-Davies
warned that whilst a lot had been achieved there was still much to do to
defend pensions.
He said there are still battles ahead and the unions needed to
maintain their unity in action to force the government back.
He pointed out that all those who are guaranteed a fabulous pension –
MPs, CBI leaders and newspaper editors in particular – believe it is
‘unreasonable’ for the rest of the population to retire at 60. Martin
said that whilst forcing back the government’s plans last year we "can’t
accept the government’s work till you drop" proposals.
He argued successfully for a special NUT conference to have a say on
any final offer from the government.
"United action forced them to retreat" he said but "we may need to
take that lesson into other struggles" including future pension
struggles.
The theme of workers fighting back was developed by Bristol delegate
and Socialist Party member, Rachael Thomas, in the debate on the
anti-union laws and the Trade Union Freedom Bill. Rachael pointed out
that Britain has the most repressive anti-union laws of any of the
advanced capitalist countries and workers’ rights had been driven back
over a century. She pointed out how some employers were using this to
sack trade union reps but also showed how, like with the Gate Gourmet
workers, when workers are compelled to struggle they can sweep the
anti-union laws aside.
Rachael pointed out that it was trade union leaders rather than the
union members, who were most fearful of the anti-union laws. She pointed
out that 100 years ago when workers had faced similar repressive laws
they had realised that industrial struggle alone was not enough and that
they needed to found a party to represent workers’ interests. A new
workers’ party was needed once again to ensure there is an industrial
and a political fight against the anti-union laws.
l Socialist Party delegates also spoke in debates on workload,
workplace bullying and inclusion. Over 100 copies of the Socialist Party
Teachers’ Bulletin and 70 copies of the socialist were sold at the
conference along with over £200 raised for the Socialist Party fighting
fund.
Bullying
IN THE debate on workplace bullying, Socialist Party member Eileen
Hunter, a Birmingham delegate, tried to intervene with a point of order
– asking for reassurance that if delegates’ speeches were used in
disciplinary cases against them then they should have the full backing
of the union.
This is what happened to Eileen, the NUT rep at her school, after
last year’s conference which led to her dismissal by ultra-Blairite
headteacher Dexter Hutt. Eileen’s daughter, Natara Hunter, a teacher at
the same school was also victimised by the same head.
Shamefully, the conference chair, ‘named’ Eileen – a form of
discipline – while she was trying to make her point of order. The chair
then effectively pressurised Eileen into making an apology. This forced
a backlash from delegates who felt that Eileen had suffered at the hands
of workplace bullies and didn’t deserve similar treatment from a
national officer of the union.
During the debate on the issue, Natara Hunter, Socialist Party member
and Birmingham delegate, said that "an injury to one is an injury to all
has to be reaffirmed as a principle of the union".
Natara recounted how whilst she and Eileen had been sacked by a
Blairite head teacher but they didn’t want "sympathy but action against
management bullying".
Around 40 delegates attended the Campaign for a New Workers’ Party
fringe meeting.
Resisting Cardiff’s school cuts
CARDIFF COUNTY Council’s decision to close 17 schools, merge another
ten and threaten 300 teaching jobs got an immediate response from school
students at Cantonian High School. They walked out of their classes and
went on strike!
Dave Reid, Cardiff Socialist Party
A teacher at Cantonian told the socialist: "Students in year 11 were
the main organisers of the protest. They protested by the fences waving
placards which they then tied to the railings.
"The council want to close the school and send the students to Radyr
but that’s a long way away and will mean losing a school in the
community. Apparently the land that the school is on is worth £1.5
million an acre, so I guess the council aims to make money on it. But if
they build houses here then there’ll be even more need for a school
here!"
Cardiff Socialist Party asks how can sacking 300 teachers improve
education in Cardiff? Falling pupil rolls are an opportunity to improve
pupil/teacher ratios in the classes. Anyway, Cardiff’s population is
rapidly increasing with young people moving into the city so the school
population is likely to rise in the future.
