The report of the findings of the inquiry into the William Tyndale Junior School in Islinaton has finally been publishedsome six months and £100,000 after the inquiry commenced.
One of the biggest ironies of the whole affair is that the inquiry and the right-wing press have always insisted that Tyndale was an 'educational dispute, not a political one as the teachers had always claimed. And yet Robin Auld QC states in his report that he was unable to find sufficient evidence to show that education at Tyndale was inferior to that of any other schools in the area.
An acquittal for the teachers? Far from it. He then goes on to say that as a "layman" he was not satisfied that the education provided by headmaster Terry Ellis and the rest of his staff was efficient or suitable to the requirements of the pupils at the school.
But what of the political allegations? The whole campaign against Tyndale was instigated bv a part-time teacher, Dolly Walker, who insisted to parents and managers that the children were being port cally indoctrinated' at Tyndale. She published her own 'Black Paper' and solicited the support of tub-thumping reactionary Rhodes Boyson.
ine man she most bittery attacked for alleged indoctrination was teacher Brian Haddow. And what does Mr Auld have to say? He claims that Terry Ellis was influenced by Haddow-who was "doctrinaire' and 'aggressive' and more interested in the philosophy of education and trving to challenge the status quo of society than the day-to-day business or educating chilaren.
Yet he also states that Brian Haddow The fight to defend jobs and imdid not try to indoctrinate the children politically, and had a 'special interest in the needs of those children who were particularly deprived.
Throughout the inquiry Auld was anxious to skirt round the political issues, although in the latter stages of the inquiry this became more difficult as 'prosection" barristers, alarmed at the lack of real evidence against the teachers, devoted STOP PRESS A meeting of Labour members of the ILEA is reliabiy reported to nave decided to:
1. Report Terry Ellis and six staff members to an independent disciplinary Tribunal.
2. Merge the William Tyndale Junior School with the Infants School.
3. Ban Brian Haddow and Terry Ellis from re-applying for their jobs at Tyndale (the rest of the staff will be able to reapply, but will not be accepted).
This was apparently decided after a "careful reading' in little more than 48 hours of the 250,000 word report of the inquiry.
their tim to cross-examining witnesses on their politics in this 'non-political inquiry.
As founder of the William Tyndale Support Campaign, I was asked whether I was a member of the International Soc lalists and questioned very closely for three hours on my political activitiesand what I knew about the political affinities of other teachers involved in the support campaign. But this of course is glossed over in the report.
And the role of Islington Labour Party in aiding and abetting a petition against the Tyndale teachers? Once again we are told by Mr Auld that this was not inery should not have been used to conduct a campaign against the school port, which acquits the teachers of political indoctrination and providing inferior education? Why the teachers of coursein particular Brian Haddow and Terry sation and resist any attempt by the Inner London Education Authority to make a decision on the fate of the Tyndale teachers before September. In this way the findings of the inquiry can be schools sub-committee, but by the National Union of Teachers.
to teachers everywhere of the lengths to which the state is prepared to go to detend the ruling class's ideas. The teachers at Tyndale have been attacked not for what they did but for what they believe.
a few heads roll as a result of this inquir then that will be the end of it. Quite the content of the school curriculum as well in schools political, but that the Labour Party machSo who will be the victims of this reAll teachers must oppose any victimiproperly examined-not just by the ILEA The Tyndale affair is a major warning But let us not delude ourselves that if contrary. There is little doubt that stricter measures will be introduced to 'control education-a tougher inspectorate, greate power to managers, a closer watch on the as a careful scrutiny of teaching methods In short, there will be a shift to the centralisation of education-a shift to the Already the effects of the cowardly policies of the left are being felt. In Haringey they have resulted in the compromise of accepting £800,000 worth of 'economies. In other councils, savings have been made by cutting back what are considered 'less important' services. South Yorkshire's envir onmental programme is being pruned by £1½ million. Lambeth, asked to cut £3 million, have found 'savings' to the tune of £1.8 million. Such a policy of compromise cannot be tolerated. If any "savings' are to be found in the 1976 budget, this should be turned over to expanding the services and for launching a campaign against the Labour Government's axe.
But the only way this policy of 'compromise and negotiation' with the Labour Government can be halted is by developing a campaign to ensure that any council which does refuse to cut will not be isolated and suffer the fate of Clay Cross under the Housing Finance Act. Already the Tories in Haringey are calling on the Government to make it another Clay Cross! Such a campaign must be clearly based on building mass action against the Government's policies. And this means explaining what the cuts would mean, what state the social services are in at present, and so on.
The TUC has hesitated to accept the latest Cabinet proposals on the cuts The public sector unions have declared their opposition in advance. Local authority workers are already taking strike action against the Shore cireular. The demand should go up from every local joint committee of public sector unions for national industrial action to be organised by their leaders.
Calls should be made on the Labour Party NEC to build opposition to the Shore cuts-by giving practical aid to local councils refusing to implement cuts, throwing its weight behind a campaign of mass industrial action for the restoration of all cuts, and calling for future expenditure to be auto matically increased to protect the social services against the effects of inflation as well as increasing social need.
Such a policy will involve a fight to open the books of national and loca administrations in order to lay future plans before the working class. As a first step, local Labour councillors should turn over the plans of local authorities to the labour movement so that an effective fight back can be prepared and executed. Furthermore, any councillor or MP voting for cuts should be replaced by someone prepared to struggle-a position adopted by the recent conference of the Labour Against the Cuts group For the choice before us is clear. Unless such a movement is built to throw back the cuts, then Healey's £1,000 million axe will indeed be the last round of cuts implemented by this Government. And for a very simple reason: it will be the Labour Government which is cut next.