Petitions
225. Prior to a ballot on selection taking place
20% of eligible parents in the area must sign a petition seeking
the ballot. Campaigners against selection have encountered difficulty
in the practical application of the petitioning and balloting
arrangements. The Campaign for State Education put the matter
as follows:
"All campaigns need people willing to devote
a great deal of their time. This is difficult in any circumstances
but campaigners to end selection have found they need the hide
of a rhinoceros to cope with vilification and misinformation of
local and national press. Campaigns are long, drawn out and complicated.
Campaigns have to focus on getting signatures on the petitions
although the real issue is selection. As a result there is no
real debate with official information about the effects of selection…
The system seems designed to ensure there is no proper
debate. Several campaigns became heavily immersed in correspondence
with the DfES… Discouraged by the Ballot Information Code,
teachers and LEAs do not make their views clear. So, a 'neutral
stance' from the professionals means in practice support for the
status quo. This line seems to have the support of the DfES [and
means that] parents are not informed by professionals and there
is no real local debate."[213]
(author's emphasis)
226. Difficulties have also been experienced in collating
data for petitions and ballots. STEP, Stop the Eleven Plus, a
campaigning group based in Kent told us that:
"In Kent the 20% target of validated signatures
needed in 2002—03
for a petition to succeed was 48,616 parents (an increase of 2,656—5.8%
since 1999—2000).
We found this out on 25th July (all school terms had ended by
the 23rd July). It has taken the Electoral Reform Society 9 months
to compile the register and announce the target figure. If we
succeeded in gathering a valid petition by the end of June, preparation
for the ballot and holding the ballot itself could not be completed
by 31st July. The petition would have to be re-validated by a
brand new register complied from September, reflecting changes
to school rolls.
Under a new register the valid petition would probably
be declared invalid. The target number is increasing as Kent's
population rises. About 4,000 signatures may no longer be valid
because their children had passed 16. Another 4,000 may be invalid
because their children may have changed school at 11. We would
be given the opportunity to "top up" the petition in
the autumn term—and can only hope that this process can
be completed well before the end of that term or … yet another
new register will be required […]
The petition itself requires not just a signature
but also the name and full address of each petitioner, the name
of their child and the child's school. Common sense prevents many
potential signatories from handing such potentially dangerous
information to strangers.
Parents with children under 16 but not at school
must register with the Electoral Reform Society by sending a birth
certificate and a utilities bill if they wish to sign a petition
or vote.[…]
These procedures are fundamentally flawed, the
details ridiculous. The thought that the Grammar School Ballot
Regulations were designed to preserve the status quo is inescapable."[214]
(emphasis added)
227. Setting aside the desirability or otherwise
of selective systems of education, the current arrangements for
a selection of local people to decide the admissions arrangements
of their grammar schools are flawed. The petition and balloting
arrangements are a gesture in the direction of local democracy
but waste the time and resources of all concerned. If the Government
believes that a local vote is the appropriate mechanism by which
the future of selective schools should be decided then it is high
time for a review of the present arrangements. In any event, the
current provision for grammar school ballots should be immediately
withdrawn so as to ensure that no further resources are wasted
in this exercise.
The question
228. The question parents are asked when the issue
of ending selection at designated grammar schools is raised takes
the following form:
Are you in favour of all the schools listed introducing
admission arrangements which admit pupils of all abilities?[215]
229. In our view this is the wrong question. It is
unreasonable to ask parents whether selection should be ended
at an individual school without making it clear what the practical
consequences of this would be.[216]
For example, to end selection at a small grammar school which
happened to be close to a non-selective school leaves open the
crucial question of what the relationship between the two schools,
and indeed others nearby, would be. Simply to create a small non-selective
school could be disastrous educationally. One solution in some
areas has been for the selective school to become a separate 14—19
school, admitting all 14 year olds and sixth formers in the area.
Alternatively such a school may become the upper school of a new
11—18
school, with the 11—14
year olds accommodated in the non-selective school's premises.
Ending selection at one school always affects the future of other
schools and parents need to be aware of this before voting on
the issue.
230. Ballot proposals also need to be make clear
the proposed future status of the school or schools created on
the ending of selection.[217]
Would the school become an Academy or become or remain foundation
or voluntary aided? What adaptations to buildings would be needed
and how would these be funded? Evidence from the Campaign for
State Education set out this difficulty in the current arrangements:
"It is clear that the petitioning and balloting
system put in place by the School Standards and Framework Act
will not result in an end to selection. Not only are there the
complex requirements for huge petitions; unfairnesses in the eligibility
to vote and virtual silencing of education professionals and the
Government, but, crucially there are no plans for a comprehensive
system for which local campaigners can campaign. So 'better the
devil' you know' arguments hold sway. Meanwhile the cost of gathering
information to provide parental lists in order for petitions to
be gathered has so far resulted in public spending of £1,102,945
since 1999."[218]
231. The balloting arrangements at present ask
the wrong question of the wrong people. It is our view that without
proposals explaining the educational and practical consequences
of ending selection at a particular school parents have insufficient
information on which to reach an informed decision on the question.
This leads us to the conclusion that the public money spent on
preparation for grammar school ballots has been wasted.
207 1998 School Standards and Framework Act, S 105. Back
208
SA 18, Annex F a. Back
209
SA 18, Annex F b. Back
210
SA 18, Annex F c. Back
211
Also see paras 220 and 222 above. Back
212
Q 976 Back
213
SA 13, Appendix 1. Back
214
SA 8, Note C. Back
215
The Education (Grammar School Ballots) Regulations 1998 para 13. Back
216
Q 984 Back
217
The text refers to a single school, although this would apply
equally to a number of schools balloted under whole area or grouped
ballots. Back
218
SA 13, para 35. Back
