"We see daily that wealth gaps are widening and that social mobility has stalled - the only way to redress these historic injustices that have prevented or diminished access for thousands is to offer them additional support, which comes through increase funding for these areas"
.jpg)
image: Wikipedia
It is the season of wild financial proclamations and, as the Ides of March pass us, it is George Osborne, ever compared to Julius Caesar thanks to the work of his image consultant, that is stabbing Nottingham in both front and back.
"A budget that puts the next generation first,” he says. But where is this next generation of successful citizens going to be from? With social mobility stalling, inequality rising and moves away from funding in areas with greater need, it feels that the country's North-South divide will become more of a chasm and Nottingham is its front line.
No one chooses to be poor, but with support and investment any young person can succeed and Nottingham is full of amazing children who will be this city's future. The successive, politically-motivated cuts and austerity programme pursued by this government is putting this at risk – particularly, in our city's local funding and its education system.
There has been an announcement of forced academisation of all schools by 2022. There are pros and cons to academisation but I'm yet to read a single study which demonstrates any quantifiable improvement in the results. Academy chains can also elect to do away any levels of local accountability within their schools with them only responsible to the chain sponsor and the Department for Education. What recourse do families have without the ability to contact a school governor or LEA?
No one chooses to be poor, but with support and investment any young person can succeed and Nottingham is full of amazing children who will be this city's future. The successive, politically-motivated cuts and austerity programme pursued by this government is putting this at risk – particularly, in our city's local funding and its education system.
There has been an announcement of forced academisation of all schools by 2022. There are pros and cons to academisation but I'm yet to read a single study which demonstrates any quantifiable improvement in the results. Academy chains can also elect to do away any levels of local accountability within their schools with them only responsible to the chain sponsor and the Department for Education. What recourse do families have without the ability to contact a school governor or LEA?
I'm not saying this is all academies, and local authority-maintained schools certainly have their issues too, but this move flies in the face of successful schools that are well run with local authority support and with parents broadly supportive too. As Kevin Courtney, the deputy general secretary of the National Union of Teachers, said yesterday:
The fig leaf of ‘parental choice’, ‘school autonomy’ and ‘raising standards’ has finally been dropped. The government’s real agenda has been laid bare – all schools removed from collaborative structures within a local authority family of schools, all schools instead run by remote academy trusts, unaccountable to parents, staff or local communities.
However, the big "ought to be the headline" should have been the proposed move toward changing from a system which adds extra weighting to a school's disadvantage or community need when apportioning the cash to a ‘per capita’ one, with every child, irrespective of any external factors, getting the same share.
If this were just the headline – every child receiving the same amount of money to go toward their schooling – then we'd probably all think this was a great thing, but look beyond that and the result will be destructive, pernicious and cruel as they are willingly writing off a generation of young people to be forever behind those with a head start and living in an area more in-line with central government doctrine.
Even more, if the Tories see this as part of their manifesto for 2020 then they are living in the past. I would make a joke about it's more like 1920, but by 1920 our school system was more progressive than what could be enacted. This would take us back beyond 1874 in terms of education policy.
If this were just the headline – every child receiving the same amount of money to go toward their schooling – then we'd probably all think this was a great thing, but look beyond that and the result will be destructive, pernicious and cruel as they are willingly writing off a generation of young people to be forever behind those with a head start and living in an area more in-line with central government doctrine.
Even more, if the Tories see this as part of their manifesto for 2020 then they are living in the past. I would make a joke about it's more like 1920, but by 1920 our school system was more progressive than what could be enacted. This would take us back beyond 1874 in terms of education policy.
The Tories are preaching equality – all well and good – but we can't reach equality without affirmative action to achieve an equitable situation for that are at a disadvantage first. Through no fault of their own, thousands of children enter school already behind those elsewhere in the country due to their lack of cultural capital. A combination of social and economic structures disadvantage these children from birth, meaning that without intervention they may lack knowledge, income, equipment or training necessary to participate fully in school and, later in life, in the world of work. They must overcome obstacles to gain these things in order to ensure fairness – and equality.
We see daily that wealth gaps are widening and that social mobility has stalled – the only way to redress these historic injustices that have prevented or diminished access thousands is to offer them additional support, which comes through increase funding for these areas. Equality can't be equal when the playing field has such a slant at the get-go.
We see daily that wealth gaps are widening and that social mobility has stalled – the only way to redress these historic injustices that have prevented or diminished access thousands is to offer them additional support, which comes through increase funding for these areas. Equality can't be equal when the playing field has such a slant at the get-go.
A cut in school funding to those schools who got more, and for good reason, means a cut in resources. A class will lose a TA. There won't be the annual school residential. Fewer classes will have additional support in PE lessons from coaches or they’ll go swimming at the local baths less. Schools will focus on English and Maths yet further children will lose out – the government claiming that the slack will be picked up by families and the "Big Society".
While qualifications are the most easily measurable dimension of educational disadvantage, this goes far beyond exams. A young person's prospects of succeeding in the world of work are not determined solely by academic success. At school, young people develop social skills from work experience, extra-curricular activities and careers advice – all likely to be at risk if funding drops as schools, judged by attainment league tables, funnel the remainder into exams.
The All Party Character and Resilience Manifesto states that "from the earliest ages, social background strongly influences who has these other predictors of later success, meaning the better-off are multiply advantaged when it comes to winning the race for good jobs".
The All Party Character and Resilience Manifesto states that "from the earliest ages, social background strongly influences who has these other predictors of later success, meaning the better-off are multiply advantaged when it comes to winning the race for good jobs".
The Social Mobility and Child Poverty Commission in their report Cracking the Code: how schools can improve social mobility back this up: "we need to prepare students for all aspects of life and not just exams [by] supporting children’s social and emotional development and the character skills like 'grit' that underpin learning".
They also observed that there are "marked social differences not just in grades that disadvantaged children get relative to better-off children, but in terms of non-cognitive skills and 'performance virtues' like resilience to educational knock-backs, persistence and optimism. There are also big social differences in access-to-work experience, advice and extra-curricular activities that build these broader skills and help convert good exam results into good jobs".
They also observed that there are "marked social differences not just in grades that disadvantaged children get relative to better-off children, but in terms of non-cognitive skills and 'performance virtues' like resilience to educational knock-backs, persistence and optimism. There are also big social differences in access-to-work experience, advice and extra-curricular activities that build these broader skills and help convert good exam results into good jobs".
Such inequalities matter and are a barrier to both learning and a young person's life chances. As highlighted by the think tank DEMOS, in their study Character Nation, developing character and resilience in young people will benefit their progress, attainment and behaviour. This should not just be "tagged onto more formal class-based learning and seen as 'enrichment', but be part of the entitlement and development of the whole child".
Direct incentives for schools to look beyond exams are relatively weak. The accountability system remains strongly focused on academic performance. However, activities 'beyond exams' and academic attainment are friends, not enemies: schools can only get children and young people to engage in learning by giving them broader experiences.
Will any of this happen with reduced funding to disadvantaged areas? Many of the schools are struggling enough under the current formula.
Now, let's look at us specifically too – Nottingham has a very tight inner city boundary. Residents in Nottingham have the lowest household disposable income of anywhere in the UK according to the Office for National Statistics with 34% of young people eligible for free school meals.
This adversely affects children and young people in a number of ways. If a child's parent or carer has less disposable income, how much of that can be spent on enriching that child's learning through visits at the weekend, school trip contributions or extra-curricular activities? Involving themselves in a child's learning becomes increasingly hard too if you're working two part-time jobs as many do, or a split shift, or a zero-hours contract with variable times of work.
This adversely affects children and young people in a number of ways. If a child's parent or carer has less disposable income, how much of that can be spent on enriching that child's learning through visits at the weekend, school trip contributions or extra-curricular activities? Involving themselves in a child's learning becomes increasingly hard too if you're working two part-time jobs as many do, or a split shift, or a zero-hours contract with variable times of work.
Nottingham is lucky to have a transport system which the local authority has kept affordable and world class facilities in the arts and sport which can be accessed for low or no cost, but these too are under attack. The primarily Labour-held former industrial towns and cities (like us, duck) have already been slashed economically through alterations in to council funding.
Council funding is dependent on three streams of income: grants from central government, Council Tax and business rates. The Revenue Support Grant from central government is decreasing year-on-year until a 100% wipeout in 2020, although the authority now keeps all of their income from business rates – these likely to be less than other areas with greater concentration of businesses, though Nottingham is no slouch.
This said, the spending power held by the city between 2014/15 to 2015/16 with these cuts and changes implemented took 5.5% out of their budget, reducing council coffers by £133.74 per household. Business rates are worked out by multiplying the 'rateable value' of your property – set by the Valuation Office Agency, by the business rates multiplier, and by central government.
While we get to keep all the dosh that comes from this, relative to other cities the property prices make returns less than elsewhere. To add insult to injury, in the budget the government have cut the business rates multiplier meaning that councils will get even less, robbing us of important services.
Council funding is dependent on three streams of income: grants from central government, Council Tax and business rates. The Revenue Support Grant from central government is decreasing year-on-year until a 100% wipeout in 2020, although the authority now keeps all of their income from business rates – these likely to be less than other areas with greater concentration of businesses, though Nottingham is no slouch.
This said, the spending power held by the city between 2014/15 to 2015/16 with these cuts and changes implemented took 5.5% out of their budget, reducing council coffers by £133.74 per household. Business rates are worked out by multiplying the 'rateable value' of your property – set by the Valuation Office Agency, by the business rates multiplier, and by central government.
While we get to keep all the dosh that comes from this, relative to other cities the property prices make returns less than elsewhere. To add insult to injury, in the budget the government have cut the business rates multiplier meaning that councils will get even less, robbing us of important services.
The other income is from council tax, calculated using the value of the property that you live, which is then banded and charged accordingly. Nottingham's lower property prices mean more people in lower council tax banded properties, which means less income – not that this is anything to be cheerful about with the vast number of people who struggle to meet their council bill every month.
Add to this the two 2% rise in council tax this year to pay for health and social care, which the government has taken away from targeted grant funding. This is in return for the power to have this additional raise, plus the regulation annual increase which pays for the ever growing catalogue of what is to be funded via council tax, alongside policing, fire and bins.
Many more will struggle to pay, be ineligible for welfare support and this will add an extra strain on the courts with the only other recourse being a court summons.
Add to this the two 2% rise in council tax this year to pay for health and social care, which the government has taken away from targeted grant funding. This is in return for the power to have this additional raise, plus the regulation annual increase which pays for the ever growing catalogue of what is to be funded via council tax, alongside policing, fire and bins.
Many more will struggle to pay, be ineligible for welfare support and this will add an extra strain on the courts with the only other recourse being a court summons.
Now tell me that there is no correlation between lower property prices and people with greater need for local authority services and I'll just laugh at you. People in lower tax bands are disproportionately in need of local authority services, end of, and this has been politically engineered by central government to damages communities like ours.
A 4% rise in council tax in Basingstoke brings in a very different figure to one here in Basford as I write in my Council Tax band B flat – an annual increase of £53.15 for next year's tax bill. Overall Nottingham's cumulative change in spending power from 2010/'11 to 2015/'16 from governmental cuts, even with revenue raising powers handed back to authorities, is -£259.66 per head.
The Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy claim the city's change in spending power due to cuts from 2014/15 to 2015/16 is as much as 10%, alongside other Labour city authorities like Manchester, Hull, Middlesbrough, Liverpool and Knowsley.
A 4% rise in council tax in Basingstoke brings in a very different figure to one here in Basford as I write in my Council Tax band B flat – an annual increase of £53.15 for next year's tax bill. Overall Nottingham's cumulative change in spending power from 2010/'11 to 2015/'16 from governmental cuts, even with revenue raising powers handed back to authorities, is -£259.66 per head.
The Chartered Institute of Public Finance and Accountancy claim the city's change in spending power due to cuts from 2014/15 to 2015/16 is as much as 10%, alongside other Labour city authorities like Manchester, Hull, Middlesbrough, Liverpool and Knowsley.
This is a double assault on our schools and on our local democracy, which we rely on for services. An assault on a city I'd bleed for and that needs support to make sure every child in it can be everything they want to be. Participation and education nationally should reflect diversity, support those who may be disadvantaged and ensure that opportunities, which help enable all children and young people to progress and achieve, be affordable and accessible to all.
We know that these cuts aren't hitting parents paying for Tarquin's bassoon lesson or Henrietta to ride Nobby the pony at the gymkhana anywhere near as hard. All we see is that the Tory party want to give tax breaks to their friends while punishing the poorest and most vulnerable in our society – their £30 a week cut to ESA disability benefit is nothing short of barbaric.
In a tweet last night, ITV's Robert Peston had worked out that "cutting benefits to disabled raises £1.2bn, which is same as cost of cutting capital gains tax & raising 40% tax threshold". We need to get angrier about this otherwise our schools' funding will be whipped out from under us before we get a say about it. Like him or loathe him, Tony Blair said this weekend that educational success determines a country's success or failure. The same can surely be said in microcosm and Nottingham cannot afford to fail its next generation.
We know that these cuts aren't hitting parents paying for Tarquin's bassoon lesson or Henrietta to ride Nobby the pony at the gymkhana anywhere near as hard. All we see is that the Tory party want to give tax breaks to their friends while punishing the poorest and most vulnerable in our society – their £30 a week cut to ESA disability benefit is nothing short of barbaric.
In a tweet last night, ITV's Robert Peston had worked out that "cutting benefits to disabled raises £1.2bn, which is same as cost of cutting capital gains tax & raising 40% tax threshold". We need to get angrier about this otherwise our schools' funding will be whipped out from under us before we get a say about it. Like him or loathe him, Tony Blair said this weekend that educational success determines a country's success or failure. The same can surely be said in microcosm and Nottingham cannot afford to fail its next generation.
George Osborne, robbing from the poor to give to the rich, is not welcome in Robin's hood.
We have a favour to ask
LeftLion is Nottingham’s meeting point for information about what’s going on in our city, from the established organisations to the grassroots. We want to keep what we do free to all to access, but increasingly we are relying on revenue from our readers to continue. Can you spare a few quid each month to support us?
