Author: Brian Foster

Advertising Standards Authority condemn Bigger, Fatter, Gypsier advertising campaign

Lord Avebury, ACERT chair and Yvonne Macnamara, CEO of the Irish Travellers Movement in Britain celebrate the Advertising Standards Authority decision on the Bigger, Fatter, Gypsier campaign.

The Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) today (Wednesday 03/10/2012) announced that Channel 4’s “Bigger Fatter Gypsier” billboard advertising campaign was irresponsible, endorsed prejudice against Gypsies and Travellers, was guilty of depicting a child in a sexualised way, and was likely to have caused mental and moral harm to children. Details of the case can be found on the ITMB website.
ACERT compiled evidence from teachers across the country on the impact that the programmes and the advertising campaign had on relations between Gypsy, Roma and Traveller pupils and other children in school. One teacher described how staff and children anticipated each new series with dread.

ACERT AGM 2012 provides food for thought

The 2012 AGM was well attended and provided a high quality input from speakers and participants. We took a shortened lunch break and abandoned the final session because the discussions around each issue were so engaging. In the next few days we’ll try to summarise the content to give those who attended the opportunity to feed back their reflections, and to those who couldn’t make it a flavour of what they missed.

The Executive wishes to thank all those who contributed in any way, and hope we can use the ideas and enthusiasm to sustain the campaign for the rights of Gypsy, Roma and Traveller communities in the forthcoming year.

DFE seeks consultant to gather community views of law change

The DFE has responded positively to the argument, put by ACERT and NATT+, that it should not rely on on-line consultation methods when gathering the views of hard to reach communities. The Department plans to appoint a “Mobile Families Outreach Contractor” to consult families likely to be affected by the proposal to repeal s444(6) of the 1996 Education Act. Applications must be submitted by noon on Friday 24th August, for a minimum of 20 days up to a maximum of 25 days between 3 September 2012 and 28 October 2012 inclusive. Full details are available on the DFE website. The online consultation is likely to take place over the same period.

ACERT recognises that the law has rarely been used and frequently misunderstood. In the current climate of zero tolerance of absences and the automatic issue of penalty notices, the concept of a defence being available strikes us as quaint. Nevertheless, we are aware that Showpeople and New Travellers who have regular travelling seasons fear that they will be criminalised for not sending their children to school; the change of law will add insult to injury caused by the undermining of distance learning by the withdrawal of funding for laptops and the cuts to Traveller Education Support.

ACERT members find that children may be absent from school because their families are responding to family crises; s444(6) does not offer any defence to such families and we would argue that any successor law should.

What is emerging is a better understanding of the Government’s notion of “equality.” In this case, and in Nick Gibbs response to Lord Avebury’s letter, it is becoming clear that equality means being treated in the same way as everyone else, rather than offering positive action to counter educational disadvantage. The ACERT AGM will provide an opportunity for everyone who shares our aims to discuss strategies for the future.

ACERT is committed to working with the communities and other organisations to press for a legal framework which recognises the validity of a nomadic way of living, and the importance of extended family responsibilities.

Minister’s defence of commitments fails to convince

Lord Avebury, ACERT president, has received a response from Nick Gibb, the Schools Minister to the letter he wrote on July 2nd expressing concern about Ofsted’s response to two of the commitments of the Ministerial Working Group.

While the minister claims to be “strongly committed to tackling the inequalities experienced by pupils from these communities”, the letter suggests there will be no changes in Ofsted practice; “[w]here an inspection discovers that particular groups of pupils are not making good progress, Ofsted will take this seriously and investigate fully.” The minister assures Lord Avebury that the changes to the inspection framework (which downgraded Gypsies, Roma and Travellers to a footnote) do not represent a weakening of Ofsted’s commitment. Even if this is the case, the Ministerial Working Group Commitments aim to reduce inequality not maintain the status quo. There are many ways in which Gypsy, Roma and Traveller pupils can fall through this net; isolated learners, children moving between schools, those who do not choose to identify themselves to the Gypsy/Roma and Traveller of Irish Heritage ethnic categories so ACERT expected positive action, focused inspections and better training of the inspectorate. Ofsted is carrying out its legal duties under the Equalities Act and no more, and the Government feels that that is sufficient.

Lord Avebury’s letter pointed out that Ofsted had also failed to highlight the problem of racist-bullying experienced by many Gypsy, Roma and Traveller pupils in its thematic review “No place for bullying.” This figured in Commitment 5 of the progress report. The Minister again offered the assurance that “the recommendations made in the document apply to all vulnerable pupils, including Gypsies, Roma and Travellers.” Again, no specific focus or positive action.

The Minister concludes by acknowledging that the Government has limited control over what Ofsted says and does, and encourages Avebury to write directly to the Chief Inspector, Sir Michael Wilshaw. The inspectorate is, rightly, independent of Government (with some notable exceptions) but the question then arises, should the Ministerial Working Group be making Commitments on its behalf. Was there any consultation, we wonder, with Ofsted before the commitments were made, or is the progress report a paper-thin cosmetic exercise which is beginning to fall apart?