One of our team went to see Steve McCabe, Labour MP for Selly Oak, as a constituent to further discuss this topic and his response, however Mr McCabe was not present and so they instead met with Mike Leddy, the Labour Councillor.
Below is a summary from our team members point of view of the conversation
His view, rather like Roger Godsiff’s second letter, is that he is not against this type of MAT; I wasn’t clear that he felt it conferred advantages, just that it wasn’t a disadvantage.
I asked about the idea that the LEA was on its way out. He was unequivocal about the fact that it is NOT, and cannot in fact be got rid of, given that it has statutory obligations. He did say it is setting up a Children’s Trust, which will be, I think, a kind of sub-body but still part of the LEA, which it will delegate to perform some of its duties. But it will still be there.
In terms of ownership of the land. Practice in Birmingham is to hand this over to the MAT, but it is written in that it can only be used for academic purposes & can’t be sold off. As such.
He said that schools would, as academies, get slightly more of the per pupil finding, but would have to buy in services normally provided by the LEA – so I can see no financial advantage there.
But. Whoever is telling parents that the LEA is due to be dissolved is either misinformed, confused, or bending the truth.
Link to Relevant Posts