 |
 |
||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
||
|
|
|||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
NATIONAL GOVERNORS ASSOCIATION |
|||
| Suspending or removing governors At the NGA AGM in Birmingham delegates discussed the issue of the procedure for suspending or removing governors from a governing body. Currently a governor can be removed by the body that appointed him/her. So a local authority governor can be removed by the local authority. The procedure is for the LA to simply inform the GB of the decision. Elected governors, such as staff and parent governors, cannot be removed. Any governor can be suspended by the governing body for up to six months. The procedure is that the suspension must be an agenda item at a full GB meeting and the accused governor must be given the opportunity to make a statement. There were two issues identified at the AGM. One was whether the existing arrangements meet the requirements of natural justice by providing an opportunity for an individual to be informed of the reason for his / her removal or suspension, and to be able to challenge the allegations made. Such an opportunity is not currently a requirement under existing regulations. The second issue is that GBs currently have no power to challenge the decision of the appointing authority if it chooses to remove a governor. In response to the debate at the AGM the NGA Board agreed to raise the issue with the DCSF and to take the matter to the NGA policy committee for discussion. We raised the issue at the DCSF Advisory Group on Governance (AGOG) this week and the other organisations present echoed our concern. The NGA has been informed of a number of examples where governors have been suspended in ways that did not appear to follow natural justice. We are also aware of at least one case where an appointing authority removed governors against the wishes of the governing body. At the AGOG meeting other organisations cited examples where elected governors had behaved completely inappropriately – in one case a parent used the ‘platform’ to campaign against the school for example. We would like to gather a wide range of views on this topic before developing a formal policy; please contact Gillian Allcroft with your views. These might include your opinion as to the extent of the problem, pus any solutions you might suggest. gillian.allcroft@nga.org.uk ICT safetyGovernors may have see coverage of the government proposals for new internet safety education in primary schools. The lessons are one element of a new government strategy being unveiled called "Click Clever, Click Safe". Currently there is only a requirement to teach secondary school pupils about internet safety. Under the new proposals, online safety could be taught to all pupils from the age of five in England as part of their personal, social, health and economic education (PSHE). What many commentators missed is the fact that these are proposals - PSHE is not currently compulsory in primary schools; the proposals depend on legislation that has yet to be published. ConsultationsThere are a number of current consultations which will be of interest to Governors. One consultation deals with the school’s power to require a pupil to attend off site courses intended to improve their behaviour. Another consultation deals with bullying, both in terms of pupils and staff, and deals with the concern raised by teacher and Headteacher organisations that the current recording system is bureaucratic and cumbersome. The ASCL bill which has just been passed includes some changes to the system of children’s centres. The NGA has had some concerns about Children’s Centres for some time, not with the concept, which we wholeheartedly support, but with the management and funding arrangements. Governing Bodies who share a site with or have a management arrangement with a Children’s Centre will wish to read section C of the statutory guidance which can be seen on the DCSF consultation pages
|
|||