[As I read it]
DEPUTATION from Adrian Hart/Brighton Don’t Divide Us supporters to Children Young People and Skills: June 14th 2021. Re: ‘Anti-racist Schools Strategy’: the consequences of BHCC adopting Critical Race Theory.
[The deputation was reported in the press – read this here]
“I suspect that only a few at BHCC know what Critical Race Theory (CRT) is. Yet by approving a 5-year ‘Anti-racist Schools Strategy’ (with the initial phase now underway via “Racial Literacy” training), CYPS has sanctioned teaching CRT beliefs to children as though they are facts [See Note (i)]. Irrespective of our political or religious beliefs, in liberal democracies we value a secular-universalist approach to state education. We strive to offer children a politically neutral sphere where they learn how to think as opposed to what to think.
At GCSE or A level stages partisan political or religious ideologies are rightly presented, discussed and balanced with differing perspectives, but we accept that they should never be promoted. For BHCC to bluntly refuse requests from me, from my ward councillor to view the ‘Racial Literacy 101’ schools staff training materials contradicts the cooperative tone of [your schools officer] who confirmed 6 weeks ago that the council was happy to be transparent on this matter. Meanwhile the consultant confirmed that she would share any materials/notes on BHCC advice. If zoom-recording one of the scheduled May sessions been so unacceptable to you why has showing us slides from the presentation and notes of the commentary proved too much to ask? In her recent reply to the group Don’t Divide Us, Cllr Clare insists that CRT is merely one of a number of training approaches on offer (ii). However, by its very nature, CRT eats other approaches for breakfast. Indeed BHCC describe its strategy when advertising the training as providing “an understanding of structural/institutional racism, white privilege and a critical race theory approach” while your executive officer states that “Critical race theory is the council’s lens for developing our understanding of the complexities of racism…”.
Once trained, the goal, it seems, is that governors, head teachers and staff will properly understand the CRT conception of “structural” and “institutional” racism. It follows, then, that a ‘racially literate’ school head, governor, teacher (and eventually pupil) is one that uses phrases like ‘structural racism’, ‘white supremacy’ and ‘white privilege’ as interchangeable terms. They must view the world through a CRT lens and teach pupils to do the same. Please explain to parents like me…
- …why, in sponsoring a partisan political ideology, you chose to contravene s406 and s407 of the Education Act (1996) and s78 of the Education Act (2002)? (iii).
- Please explain to us why you approved a CRT approach given that it invites teachers and children to define and treat one another differently according to the immutable characteristic of skin colour. Amongst younger children, this will inevitably foster confusion, distress and division. As such, your choice of CRT is surely a breach of the Public Sector Equality Duty (section 149 1c) the duty to foster good relations ….’ (iv).
- Explain to us why Cllr Clare refutes any mandatory element when the anti-racism strategy explicitly states the training will become mandatory ‘further down the line’ (v). My local primary – Carlton Hill School – encouraged by trusted BHCC officers, has booked the training for its entire teaching staff. The September 2021 Inset day, like all Inset’s, is mandatory.
- Explain to us why such a fundamental and controversial change has taken place without the fullest public discussion (vi). Once made aware of it, the public at large are likely to oppose CRT. Many will be appalled that they were not consulted about a programme teaching white children to recognise their inherited racial guilt while non-white children learn that they are victims of their classmates’ systemic racism. The divisiveness of this strategy is indeed appalling – or at least it seems so because you will not allow public scrutiny of the training.
To be clear: As with your or my personal choice of political or religious creed, we’re free to embrace CRT. As councillors, you are free to be true believers in this or any ideology you like; but as a council committee, the way you have chosen to impose a CRT approach on our schools is illiberal and undemocratic. I trust committee members who were unaware of the implications of the BHCC Anti-racist Schools Strategy will speak out.
A good way to resolve this – if you feel I’ve got this wrong – is to have me meet [your schools officer] and have her walk me through the Racial Literacy training (I’ll take notes and we’ll have made progress! I don’t mind if I end up looking foolish for exaggerating the CRT element. Hiding the training from scrutiny is unwise but worse, to cite “commercial interests” is (as the ICO will eventually tell you) a misreading of the Act.”
END
Reply from CYPS Chair Hannah Clare:
“We apologise for our delay in response to your foi, it must be frustrating, but as it involves external providers we need to liaise with them and we will respond as soon as we are able to.
The council has pledged to be an anti-racist council with an immediate focus on addressing racial discrimination and disadvantage across all our public services and within our own organisation. The work is central to the council’s legal duties under the Equality Act 2010 to eliminate discrimination, advance equality of opportunity and foster good relations between communities, as well as to encourage civic engagement by under-represented groups.
As a council we believe that racism is not just the product of individual bias or prejudice, but something embedded in our systems which is why the rich, ethnic diversity in our city is not represented in council or teacher employees. Talking about systemic racism is not divisive, but racism is.
Our racial literacy training for schools explains that we are all one human race, and that race is a social construct used for example to justify slavery and the holocaust. By understanding the history of racism, we will equip school staff to take steps to prevent and mitigate the experiences of racism in our communities.
Critical race theory is our lens for developing our understanding of the complexities of racism and not an ideology. There is nothing in our strategy that aims to engender guilt or victimhood and the development of critical thinking skills is one element of our educational input.
Staff training is just one aspect of the anti-racist schools strategy. In the latest version of the strategy it is made clear that the local authority does not plan to make any training offered to schools mandatory, although schools will be encouraged to work in partnership with us under the strategy. Schools are also free to engage any training provider to deliver training to their staff in line with school values and policy. The provider they have chosen has delivered a lot of training for the council and in Brighton & Hove schools and has received positive feedback.
I’m really proud of the work we are doing in our schools to be anti-racist, and the wider work across the council.
We accept that as a council we have a lot to learn and a lot to do to prevent and mitigate against the racism that pupils, students and their families have told us happens in our schools. We are proud of how Brighton & Hove schools are engaging with us and leading on this complex work and hopeful that our approach will make a difference. And we note that your Deputation does not provide us with any idea of how we can respond to racism in Brighton and Hove Schools”.
Postscript from me:
As deputation rules allow up to 2 pages of footnotes I made sure that I provided examples of alternative ways to respond to racism in schools (the rule of thumb being, imo, ‘first do no harm’!). The last line of Cllr Clare’s reply indicates that the footnotes were ignored. A bit of an insult I reckon but hey ho. I have pointed out to Cllr Clare that its also noted from my side that her reply did not provide me with a response to most of the points I raised. AH