Anderton Park School
Posted on
The Equality Act has nine protected characteristics. They are:
- Age
- Disability
- Gender reassignment
- Marriage and civil partnership
- Pregnancy and maternity
- Race
- Religion or belief
- Sex
- Sexual orientation
Under the Equality Act primary schools have a duty of care to deliver an inclusive and non-discriminatory curriculum but it does not indicate at what age each of the nine protected characteristics should be taught to children, nor does it lay down how each of the protected characteristics should be taught. It leaves this decision, unfairly in my opinion, to the Head Teacher but the guidance states time and again, that age- appropriateness must be taken into account as should religious beliefs and that there should be ongoing and regular consultation with parents.
Some of the parents of children at Anderton Park School became concerned about some of the materials and books their children were bringing home. They felt they said things that they believed conflicted with the moral and family values that they as parents had taught them at home. A number of parents then had individual meetings with the Head Teacher to express their concerns and it is alleged the response from the Head Teacher was “that it is the law.” The parents, through their appointed spokesperson, requested that a parents meeting be called so that all parents could have their say, but it is alleged that the Head Teacher refused. The concerned parents, therefore, organised their own meeting and the spokesperson wrote to the Head Teacher and Governors to express the concerns of the parents. The response referred to the Equality Act, but no offers of engagement or consultation with parents were forthcoming from the school. The parents decided, therefore, to begin protesting outside the school.
After the protests began I had a meeting with the Head Teacher and I offered a suggestion that the teaching of some of the nine protected characteristics could be phased in and made more age-appropriate to allay the concerns of parents. The guidance from the DFE specifically states:
“We expect all pupils to have been taught LGBT content at a timely point.”
My staff and myself also had meetings with the parents and their appointed representatives who were protesting. The parents’ representative gave a version of events which did not always coincide with what the Head Teacher had said to me. I, therefore, asked for documentary evidence, which was provided, and has been passed to the DFE.
I have had regular contact with the police who have had a presence at a number of the protests but who have been placed in a very difficult position. The protestors have notified the police when they intend to protest and when it will end. The police can only intervene when, and if, a criminal offence has been committed. The Head Teacher told me members of her staff and parents felt threatened and I advised her to seek a “Restraint Order” at the Magistrates Court. If such an order was granted, and then breached, the police would become involved because a contempt of court would have been committed. I understand that the Council have issued some sort of barring orders, but these have no legal validity.
The Council, on the recommendation of their officers, asked a senior officer with the CPS to mediate a few weeks ago. I am told he had a meeting with the parents’ spokesperson; the elected representatives of the parents; their legal advisor and an academic teacher who had devised a module for teaching the nine characteristics. I am given to understand that he then went to see the Head Teacher, but nothing seems to have materialized. Subsequently the parents received letters from the Head Teacher inviting small groups – 3 or 4 – to meet with her for an hour. The parents who went to these meetings, so I am told, were given a list of 27 books and a form for them to “tick” to indicate which of the books were, in their opinion, appropriate for what year/age group. As some of the female parent’s had a limited grasp of the English language this proved challenging. Furthermore, the protesting parents made the point that this hardly constitutes “consultation” as defined, on numerous occasions, in the legislation and guidance, nor is it like the “consultation” that has taken place at other local primary schools such as Nelson Mandela and Clifton.
I have considerable sympathy for the predicament that the Head Teacher at Anderton Park School is placed in as I have with other Head Teachers of primary schools in my constituency. The Equality Act is a very good piece of legislation which I voted for. I agree with, and support, the Act but it should have defined, more clearly, at what age each of the “protected characteristics” should be taught after consultation with parents who the Act acknowledges, have the primary responsibility for bringing up their children. Parliament or local councils should have had this responsibility so that if electors thought that the various “protected characteristics” were not being taught at the appropriate age, they could have engaged with their local Councillors or MP, rather than having Head Teachers exposed because they had exercised their judgement. We are, however, where we are.
Some people have used the dispute at Anderton Park School as a means of trying to portray it as a clash between the LGBT community and Muslim culture because they have their own agendas. Not only is this totally untrue but it is contemptible. This is not a clash between Muslim and LGBT lifestyles and anyone who seeks to portray it as such is beneath contempt.
I very much regret that this conflict ever arose. Meetings should have taken place between the teaching staff and parents before the teaching of the Equality Act began. Parents should have been told what the Equality Act was about, and that it was now law. They should also have been told what the protected characteristics were and how, and how the school proposed to teach them and what materials they intended to use. Parents should have been invited to give their comments and make suggestions as to the “age-appropriateness” of each “protected characteristic.” If this had been done it would have satisfied the overwhelming majority of parents and would have complied with the guidance which repeatedly refers to the need for consultation with parents.
I will continue to engage with the council and DFE to try and bring this dispute to an end and I have asked the protestors to end the protest.
