There are plenty of HEors who have been making their intentions very clear: they won't go along with the Badman recommendations and it looks as if the DCSF will have to cost for locking up a lot of yummy mummies who had previously been upstanding members of society.
It has been said elsewhere:
"It is NOT acceptable for the state to have ultimate control of the education of our children
It is NOT acceptable for the state to make ultra vires judgements about the welfare of our children and then act in loco parentis
It is NOT acceptable for the state to operate on a presumption of guilt
It is NOT acceptable for the state to demand access to our children without reasonable suspicion that an actual offence has been or is about to be committed
It is NOT acceptable for the state to demand unsupervised access to our children
These are all contained within the recommendations of Badman's review document. The government has them accepted in full as "proportionate and reasonable".
23 comments:
Is it okay to copy? :)
There must be a market for t'shirts with that design :)
Well said!
Shirl x
Just say No to the DCSF ... get the code for the badge at http://tinyurl.com/ko8kll
From Blogdial:
Now we read that almost instantly, there is a new consultation that they want everyone to fill out, to discuss how Home Educators are to be monitored and registered. The arrogance of these people is breathtaking. They have presumed in advance that Home Educators agree with Graham Badman, and will co-operate with the elimination of their rights and the giving up of their children.
The fact of the matter is that no one agrees with this review. I strongly suggest that you do not engage with this consultation.
Answering the previous consultations did not result in government listening to the concerns of Home Educators and then acting on them, and this one will be no different. This consultation must be boycotted by Home Educators. By engaging with it, you give legitimacy to the state; legitimacy that it has completely lost. If you answer this consultation, they will be able to say that Home Educators were consulted, allowing them to portray themselves as reasonable and fair, no matter what it is they are doing. Look at the questions:
Question 1 Do you agree that these proposals strike the right balance between the rights of parents to home educate and the rights of children to receive a suitable education?
Question 2 Do you agree that a register should be kept?
Question 3 Do you agree with the information to be provided for registration?
Question 4 Do you agree that home educating parents should be required to keep the register up to date?
Question 5 Do you agree that it should be a criminal offence to fail to register or to provide inadequate or false information?
Question 6a Do you agree that home educated children should stay on the roll of their former school for 20 days after parents notify that they intend to home educate?
Question 6b Do you agree that the school should provide the local authority with achievement and future attainment data?
Question 7 Do you agree that DCSF should take powers to issue statutory guidance in relation to the registration and monitoring of home education?
Question 9 Do you agree that the local authority should visit the premises where home education is taking place provided 2 weeks notice is given?
Question 10 Do you agree that the local authority should have the power to interview the child, alone if this is judged appropriate, or if not in the presence of a trusted person who is not the parent/carer?
Question 11 Do you agree that the local authority should visit the premises and interview the child within four weeks of home education starting, after 6 months has elapsed, at the anniversary of home education starting, and thereafter at least on an annual basis? This would not preclude more frequent monitoring if the local authority thought that was necessary.
Now I have a question for YOU.
Question 12 Do you really believe that if you answer in the negative to all of these questions, that the Badman proposals will be dropped?
If you do, you are COMPLETELY DELUSIONAL.
DO NOT RESPOND TO THE CONSULTATION.
Your fundamental rights cannot be erased by dint of a consultation that anyone can answer, or a review by a paranoid imbecile or a minister from a totally discredited government on its last legs.
I'm not responding to the consultation.
Whilst I realise this is a stitch up, not filling in the consultation is not an option. It's like not voting.
What is needed is massive campaigining against this along with filling in the consultation. Hound your MP's, MEP's, write to newspapers local and national, write on blogs. Do something everyday.
Get your parents/sisters/other HE sympathisers to do the same - pre-write the letters for them if you have to. Don't let it rest.
Hi Merry,
I think it's fine to nick...ah yes, just seen Boho's comment. Phew. I got it from Boho who had made the code available.
x
I will not answer their consultation because they are consulting me on my own enslavement. However, i will be engaging. I will be telling people , including my MP why I will not play their consultation game anymore. I have written pages and pages for their consultations and they have thrown my words back in my face every time. Well sod that! I would rather engage in other ways.
and I don't quite understand this:
"not filling in the consultation is not an option"
Are you Mr Badman? I thought I had options still!
I think that they may be counting agrees and disagrees (as they are machines) in which case it may be better for us to at least push the disagree button. You don't have to identify yourself or leave comments.
Danae
http://www.threedegreesoffreedom.blogspot.com
I agree with the Boycott. We've played their game long enough, it is quite obvious from the review that they haven't considered any of our opinions. I will not dignify this disgraceful document with a response. I suggest we spend our time campaigning and lobbying every MP who can vote this down when the time comes. This is a full frontal attack on civil liberties - we must get that message across loud and clear.
If you are not going to comply, you will have to consider very carefully what you are going to do when the policemen come calling. I'm not saying that you should comply, only that you need a plan.
People are already pledging cash for a legal fund. I think this might be the way to go.
Who is organising this?
D
Hi D,
re: the legal fund for HEors.
So far, (as far as I know) it has just been a number of informal pledges on some HE yahoo lists, but I think the plan is to get more formal, should the review be taken seriously after the consultation.
Maybe we should think about professional lobbyists too. I've been checking some out online. One does some pro bono work - it might be worth a try, even just for some advice. Civil Rights orgs too - Focusing on the right of access to the home & child - more power than the police hold.
the pledge is here:
http://www.pledgebank.com/No-to-DCSF
I gather there is also a fund being started by AHEd. Does anyone happen to know more?
Yes, I think the lobbyist idea is a good one.
Lord Lucas mentions that there is something going on with the Apprenticeship bill
http://lordlucas.blogspot.com/2009/06/home-education-good-man-badman.html
so we might need to be quick on this one though!
Apprenticeship Bill:
http://www.dcsf.gov.uk/draftapprenticeshipsbill/
I've found 3 firms of lobbyists. I'll appeal to them and see if they're willing to help pro bono.
I'll let you know how I get on.
I am a California homeschooler watching what is happening to UK homeschoolers from afar.
Is there anything that we can do here in the U.S.?
I would like to extend my 150% support of your efforts to defeat the amazingly brazen action of your government against your freedoms.
We are watching closely. It may well be our turn in the near future. Everything we can learn about what works to keep our rights is good for everyone.
Rock on, UK homeschoolers!
nice article
Post a Comment