Keith Sinclair (Hull NUT delegate - personal capacity THE PRESS attacks on "militant" teachers 'howling' at David Blunkett at Easter's NUT conference obscured the real significance of the Education Secretary of State's reception.
A year ago Blunkett was given a standing ovation by at least half the delegates at the conference, whilst this year an attempt by some of the platform to engineer a repeat performance fell flat as a pancake.
This lack of enthusiasm by delegates reflects a real problem for the leadership of Britain's largest teaching union. Members are increasingly cynical about Labour's attitude towards education.
The NUT leadership has for years adopted a policy of waiting for Labour. The idea was promoted that the incoming Labour government would represent the answer to the problems created by years of Tory misrule. However, despite certain positive steps, the overall balance sheet is acgalive. Not only have New Labour failed to reverse Tory education policies, in certain cases they have introduced policies that are worse. The union's attitude towards Education Action Zones was a key dividing line in the conference. Education Action Zones (EAZs) are to be introduced in deprived areas as part of Labour's attack on social exclusion.
Labour is correct to identify the need for urgent action to be taken in depressed areas but their solution is totally wrong. The proposed zones will be run by an Education Action Forum which will include business interests. Labour has stated publicly that they hope at least one of the early zones will be led by private business.
This has led to American companies such as Edison trying to enter the English education system in order to make a profit out of kids and teachers. Edison have submitted a bid for an area in Tameside.
The union has urged NUT local branches to negotiate Cenan conditions with LEAs to enable the NUT to go along with EAZs. The issue of retaining paymand conditions is highlighted along with the need for local education authorities to take the "lead role".
The problem is that once EAZS are here they will spread and attacks on pay and particularly conditions will appear in the future. The sad reality is that a few years down the line an EAZ forum could change pay and conditions. The left narrowly lost the conference vote on complete opposition to EAZs. However, the campaign against them will go on. Despite the anger of teachers over the staging of this year's pay increase, the issue of pay was not a major issue at conference. This was due to the national executive proposing that a special one day conference be held in September to consider our pay claim including proposals for salary restructuring. For the last few years, the left has correctly focused on the need for action over pay. The need for action remains but there also a need to pressure from quickly discuss delegates and and agree proposals members meant the on restructurWing of the pay leadership had to scales. The criticise Labour on a danger is that wide range of any talk of a real fight on pay issues will be submerged into the minutiae of changes in the structure. Just before conference, both the NUT and the NASUWT announced large ballot majorities for non-strike industrial action over workload issues. There is some confusion as to exactly what Scientific tests confirm no trace of socialism or radicalism in David Blunkett this will entail. However, the ballot victory, albeit on a turn-out of only 28 per cent, does give the opportunity to hold school union meetings to decide what members will decide to do. Collective actions are-key here so that individuals are not isolated.
Towards the end of conference, the tabloids screamed about the demands of teachers for a four day week. This was a blatant misrepresentation of a debate which was about the left trying to step up the workload action by means of a Contract Week in the Autumn term.
NUT conference has excellent policy on the need for a national contract. Unfortunately, there is no sign of the current national leadership doing anything to lead a real fight on this issue.
Throughout the conference, the leadership faced two ways. On the one hand, they were insistent, especially General Secretary Doug McAvoy, that this was a government "we could do business with". On the other hand, the pressure from delegates and members meant the leadership had to criticise Labour on a wide range of issues such as the naming and shaming of allegedly "failing" schools.
These tensions are likely to continue. The leadership is going to be unable to satisfy the demands of members and keep a cosy relationship with the government. It is the job of the left in the union to push forward members' demands to ensure real pressure is put on Blunkett and Blair and their supporters running local councils. The Socialist Teachers' Alliance is organising an important conference on EAZs in London on 9 May. This conference will be used as a springboard to launch a national campaign including a national march in one of the EAZ areas, possibly Tameside.