This week's PR fail: the Department of Education and Megan Stammers

Teachers accused of offences against children: anonymous unless charged.

On Monday, legislation comes into force which means teachers accused of offences against children have lifelong anonymity unless they are charged.

Unfortunately for the Department of Education and teaching unions, this comes at the same time as a high-profile news story illustrating how ludicrous the new law is - that of Eastbourne teacher Jeremy Forrest who has now been discovered with 15-year-old schoolgirl Megan Stammers in Europe.

I can name him today, but as of Monday, who knows? This situation today prompted the Department of Education to put out a press release, the first sentence of which is the exact opposite of the truth.

A Department for Education spokesperson said:

This change will not affect cases like the one currently getting national attention. The police, media organisations and others will be able to apply to a magistrate for an order lifting teacher anonymity. If it is in the best interest of the child, this will be granted straightaway so the public can help the police. No teacher who has been charged with an offence, or where a warrant for arrest has been issued, will enjoy anonymity.

While situations like this are not common, it is the case that malicious and groundless allegations against teachers have been a serious problem in our schools. A survey for the Association of Teachers and Lecturers found that one in four school staff has been subject to false allegations from pupils. We want teachers to be confident that they can impose discipline without their careers and personal lives potentially being blighted by baseless claims.

Unfortunately the new law will affect cases exactly like the one currently getting national attention.

In future, the next time a teacher abducts a child in their care the police will have to go to a magistrate and argue the case for their right to anonymity to be waived. The order could well be opposed.

Anyone who has tried to get information out of a police press office will know that they can be pretty slow off the mark at the best of times when it comes to divulging information about recent crimes and this crazy piece of legislation is not going to help matters.

As an aside, the new legislation doesn't just affect the media - it means that parents who make accusations about teachers to each other could fall foul of the act. The result of all this will mean that teachers who have a reputation for overstepping the normal bounds of the teacher-child relationship, but are never convicted of anything, will move from school to school protected by lifelong anonymity over any accusations which may have been made about them.

Photograph: Getty Images

Dominic Ponsford is editor of Press Gazette

Getty
Show Hide image

The SNP thinks it knows how to kill hard Brexit

The Supreme Court ruled MPs must have a say in triggering Article 50. But the opposition must unite to succeed. 

For a few minutes on Tuesday morning, the crowd in the Supreme Court listened as the verdict was read out. Parliament must have the right to authorise the triggering of Article 50. The devolved nations would not get a veto. 

There was a moment of silence. And then the opponents of hard Brexit hit the phones. 

For the Scottish government, the pro-Remain members of the Welsh Assembly and Sinn Féin in Northern Ireland, the victory was bittersweet. 

The ruling prompted Scotland’s First Minister, Nicola Sturgeon, to ask: “Is it better that we take our future into our own hands?”

Ever the pragmatist, though, Sturgeon has simultaneously released her Westminster attack dogs. 

Within minutes of the ruling, the SNP had vowed to put forward 50 amendments (see what they did there) to UK government legislation before Article 50 is enacted. 

This includes the demand for a Brexit white paper – shared by MPs from all parties – to a clause designed to prevent the UK reverting to World Trade Organisation rules if a deal is not agreed. 

But with Labour planning to approve the triggering of Article 50, can the SNP cause havoc with the government’s plans, or will it simply be a chorus of disapproval in the rest of Parliament’s ear?

The SNP can expect some support. Individual SNP MPs have already successfully worked with Labour MPs on issues such as benefit cuts. Pro-Remain Labour backbenchers opposed to Article 50 will not rule out “holding hands with the devil to cross the bridge”, as one insider put it. The sole Green MP, Caroline Lucas, will consider backing SNP amendments she agrees with as well as tabling her own. 

But meanwhile, other opposition parties are seeking their own amendments. Jeremy Corbyn said Labour will seek amendments to stop the Conservatives turning the UK “into a bargain basement tax haven” and is demanding tariff-free access to the EU. 

Separately, the Liberal Democrats are seeking three main amendments – single market membership, rights for EU nationals and a referendum on the deal, which is a “red line”.

Meanwhile, pro-Remain Tory backbenchers are watching their leadership closely to decide how far to stray from the party line. 

But if the Article 50 ruling has woken Parliament up, the initial reaction has been chaotic rather than collaborative. Despite the Lib Dems’ position as the most UK-wide anti-Brexit voice, neither the SNP nor Labour managed to co-ordinate with them. 

Indeed, the Lib Dems look set to vote against Labour’s tariff-free amendment on the grounds it is not good enough, while expecting Labour to vote against their demand of membership of the single market. 

The question for all opposition parties is whether they can find enough amendments to agree on to force the government onto the defensive. Otherwise, this defeat for the government is hardly a defeat at all. 

 

Julia Rampen is the editor of The Staggers, The New Statesman's online rolling politics blog. She was previously deputy editor at Mirror Money Online and has worked as a financial journalist for several trade magazines.