Steiner Secrecy??

Excellent blog post here by Andy Lewis on the Steiner Free School that is being proposed in Bristol (see this Post story for the latest news on this here). Andy is rightly calling for the school's advocates to be fully open about what Rudolf Steiner (see left) and Anthroposophy stand for and whether/how this will be put into practice if the Bristol Steiner Free School goes ahead. Andy asks these pertinent questions:

1. Will you publish what associations you have with the Anthroposophical Movement?

 

2. Will you publish a full discussion of how Anthroposophy and Steiner’s work inspire teaching within the school?

 

3. Will you fully state how you ensure Steiner’s racial teachings do not influence the School?

 

4. Will you explain how Steiner’s work influences your teaching of science?

 

5. Will you publish what the spiritual and religious elements of your curriculum are?

 

6. What role does Anthroposophical Medicine play in your School’s ethos and how will you ensure parents are fully informed and the nature of any therapies or treatments given to students?

 

7. Will you tell parents about the gnomes?

You can read more views on Steiner and see links to many others from here: http://www.openwaldorf.com/steiner.html . Also see my previous post on the proposed school which expresses my particular concern that Steiner's ideas are highly inconsistent with modern science here.

Co-operation and Cabinet

Bristol's Labour Party could decide tonight not to accept places on the new Mayor's Cabinet or to advise the Mayor (see here) and impose a ban on all its members. I hope they dont [**see the series of updates below!]. Local govt co-operation between parties is eminently sensible – and it’s what people have voted for, so this should be recognised provided the new Cabinet is: committed to taking decisions openly and accountably; and its members are able, diplomatically, to speak their minds and not own every single Mayoral decision.

Each individual Councillor and Party needs to change mindset and both scrutinise, criticise and support as appropriate. Conscience first not party – that’s what they are supposed to be doing according to the code of conduct they sign up to in any case! This code includes ‘making decisions on merit’ and reaching ‘their own conclusions on the issues before them and act in accordance with those conclusions’.  Councillors have power through a vote on the council, through committee work and through lobbying the Mayor, Deputy Mayor and Asst Mayors when in place. Hopefully some power will be properly and effectively devolved to local councillors and people in neighbourhoods soon too.

Labour were the party with councillors that got the most votes and in next May's local elections Labour are likely to make gains on the council - the Tory and Lib Dem vote has sunk and is unlikely to recover enough for them not to suffer councillor losses. I'm most in favour of people getting into the Cabinet on the basis of merit not party but having said that the Mayor should also take into account which parties the public are voting for.
______________________________
**
[Update 22 November: According to The Post Bristol's Labour Party last night voted against taking up three Cabinet seats offered to them and so have have refused the opportunity to argue for their policies directly with the Mayor and others. Its still unclear to me whether they voted to ban all members from taking part.]

[Update 23 November: According to The Post Labour Councillors in Bristol have agreed to join the Mayor's Cabinet and have gone against the local party vote. Its a good sign that Labour Councillors have asserted themselves. Its Bristol's voters they have to be listening to and not just the local party and they seem to have done that. Which Councillors finally end up doing what is not yet finaliised though.]

[Update 26 November (!!!): According to Bristol 24-7 and ITV West and The Post Labour's South West regional organisation, probably with some central party influence, has prevented Bristol's Labour Councillors from joining the Mayor's Cabinet. This has caused Cllr Peter Hammond the Leader of Bristol's Labour Councillors to resign. It remains to be seen whether individuals choose to defy this intsruction.]

Eco-Mayor? Open Mayor?

Labour candidate for Mayor Marvin Rees does not have good green credentials. Labour in Bristol and nationally have had very little to say on the sustainable development that greens want. Several of Marvin's statements indicate a lack of regard for sustainability, for instance: "freeing up public owned land to build homes" (here), which could mean going back to flogging off our cities parks and green spaces; and favouring the existing plans for the expansion of Bristol Airport, saying "Going forward, I am in support of developing the airport." (here) . He wont be getting my second preference vote as a result of this - and because he is not open enough to working with people in other political parties and in no party.  We need a Mayor who understands economic, social and environmental sustainability challenges and who wants to include people in his cabinet on the basis of expertise not political colour.

Limited, limiting Liberals

Bristol's Liberal Democrats have drawn up a shortlist of potential candidates for the role of Bristol mayor – but have refused to say who is on it...(full story here). Not a very open approach from Nick Clegg's party, whose constitution begins by saying' The Liberal Democrats exist to build and safeguard a fair, free and open society...' !!

I'd like to to see the evidence that backs this statement on the [high on humility!?] Lib Dem MP for Bristol West Stephen Williams too '...my name recognition is incredibly high, and polling we have done shows people have a positive opinion of me in Bristol...'. Be open and release this information Liberal Democrats!!

City Deal

The £100-million Bristol Metro train network which will bring massive improvements to local railways is to go ahead with the first services running by 2016. It comes as a result of the City Deal agreed between local council and the Government which was announced yesterday...(more here).

Business rates to be kept in Bristol and used to raise more money for investment is very welcome. Plans to improve the local rail network are also welcome. Lets hope what is planned is effective and efficient. I do think there is a democratic deficit in all this thinking though and would like to see much greater and inbuilt opportunities for public participation, creating better openness and accountability - it wont be sufficient to simply lobby our authorities to use this money in the best way.

Details of the 'City Deal' for Bristol, according to The Post, are:

* A new growth incentive and the economic investment fund, which will allow West of England to keep 100 per cent of growth in business rates over 25 years to invest in projects, allowing authorities to deliver an investment programme worth £1 billion over 30 years.

*  Ten years of major funding allocation for the Greater Bristol Metro; flexible delivery for the Bus Rapid Transit Network which will allow savings to be recycled locally; and new powers over rail planning and delivery.

*— A Public Property Board will manage up to £1 billion of city council assets and an estimated 180 land and property assets to unlock more land for economic growth or housing and to lever in additional investment.

* A city growth hub with up to £2.25 million of government funding which will provide additional support to inward investors. This will be based in the Temple Quarter Enterprise Zone and will work closely with UK Trade and Investment.

* The business community and local enterprise partnership will have more influence in skills provision in the city region, in particular the £114 million Skills Funding Agency funding for Further Education colleges for post-16 provision, to help capture employer demand.

Steiner and science

A group of parents and teachers have launched a campaign to create a new free school. The Bristol Steiner Free School group announced...that it would bid next February for government approval of the project. Free schools are state-funded but independent of council control and set up in response to demand from groups of parents....[The group said the school would have] a strong academic element, specialising in environmental sciences...The Steiner School movement emerged from the ideas of early 20th century educationalist Rudolf Steiner. (full story).

Steiner (pictured) claimed direct experience of the 'spiritual' world. He was a philosopher, occultist, social reformer, architect, esotericist. and founded Anthroposophy. Anthoposophy claims to investigate the spiritual world and believes it can attain precise and clear conclusions in the same way that science concludes about the physical world.

I've been an active green for 30 yrs and I teach environmental sciences  (which is simply the proper application of scientific methods to the environment). I do not support Steiner's ideas or Steiner Free Schools and would point to the British Humanist Association concerns about them (see http://www.humanism.org.uk/news/view/1042 ).

Like others commenting on this Post report I can’t see how Steiner's ideas are at all consistent with modern science and its methods and so I am as concerned about Steiner Free Schools setting up with public money and support as I am about certain other kinds of Free School with a significant ideology behind them instead of openness, questioning and reason.

Background on Steiner:
http://www.rudolfsteinerweb.com/  and  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rudolf_Steiner  

Councillors Code of Conduct

All councillors sign up to Bristol City Councils Code of Conduct for Members which includes the ten principles of public life below*. I have to say that the way conventional party politics works – with Whips enforcing a party line - it’s very hard to see how all councillors are consistently ‘making decisions on merit’ and reaching ‘their own conclusions on the issues before them and act in accordance with those conclusions’. This is something I will certainly examine and challenge if elected because its very important that councillors are objective and make good personal judgements (note that elected Green Party councillors won’t use a Whip system like other parties do). No point in signing up to a code you only follow part of!

*The Ten General Principles of Public Life

Selflessness – member should serve only the public interest and should
never improperly confer an advantage or disadvantage on any person.

Honesty and integrity – members should not place themselves in situations where their honesty and integrity may be questions, should not behave improperly, and should on all occasions avoid the appearance of such behaviour.

Objectivity – members should make decisions on merit, including when
making appointments, awarding contracts, or recommending individuals for rewards or benefits.

Accountability – members should be accountable to the public for their
actions and the manner in which they carry out their responsibilities, and
should co-operate fully and honestly with any scrutiny appropriate to their particular office.

Openness – member should be as open as possible about their actions and those of their authority, and should be prepared to give reasons for thoseactions.

Personal judgement – member may take account of the views of others, including their political groups, but should reach their own conclusions on the issues before them and act in accordance with those conclusions.

Respect for others - members should promote equality by not discriminating against any person, and by treating people with respect, regardless of their race, age, religion, gender, sexual orientation or disability. They should respect the impartiality and integrity of the authority’s statutory officers and its other employees.

Duty to uphold the law – members should uphold the law and, on all
occasions, act in accordance with the trust that the public is entitled to place in them.

Stewardship - member should do whatever they are able to do to ensure that their authorities use their resources prudently, and in accordance with the law.

Leadership – members should promote and support these principles by
leadership and by example, and should act in a way that secures or preserves public confidence.

A World In Waiting: 10 Feb, Colston Hall

Passing on this from Nick Thomas...I'm just spreading word of a free event that may be of interest. It's the final event of the European Year for Combating Poverty & Social Exclusion - a large-scale exercise in direct democracy that we hope will attract a wide range of contributors with interest, ideas or experience of the issues involved. It's called A World in Waiting, evoking the better world that we hold in our hearts and that we could and should do more to make a reality. The agenda is completely open, to be set on the day - and the Dept for Work & Pensions is expecting us to generate 5 “policy asks” from the day’s deliberations, so it should have practical outcomes!

It takes place this Thursday (10th Feb) at the Colston Hall - and is open to everyone. It runs from 10am-5pm, but you're welcome to drop in at any time for as long as you like. Full details are at http://www.aworldinwaiting.eu. Do get in touch if you'd like to know more - and do please spread the word. We hope to fill the Colston Hall!
Many thanks,
Nick.


Nick Thomas
The Pierian Centre
Tel: 0117 924 4512
www.pieriancentre.com

UK politicians hide our total carbon emissions

In debates whilst standing in the local and general elections - and in debates for yrs before then - councillors and MPs have always told me that UK carbon emissions were falling (Kerry McCarthy even sent me a graph in the post). As someone who has worked and campaigned in this area for yrs I've known that this is not the case and have thus argued the toss with people from all the big parties. You can see why the story below might catch my eye then...

BBC News - Openness urged on UK's emissions

The UK government's chief environment scientist has called for more openness in admitting Britain's apparent cuts in greenhouse gases are an illusion.

Robert Watson says that if emissions "embedded" in imported goods are counted, UK emissions are up, not down.

He says the same syndrome is true for other rich nations which offshored manufacturing industry.

That means developing countries - particularly China - are blamed for goods they buy for export to the West.

“We don't have jurisdiction over emissions embedded in imports, they're difficult to calculate accurately”

He said: "At face value UK emissions look like they have decreased 15% or 16% since 1990. But if you take in carbon embedded in our imports, our emissions have gone up about 12%. We've got to be more open about this."...

Click on the BBC link to read more.

Conservative Party: how money talks

Tories sell access to ministers for £1,000 a head - Telegraph

More evidence of building a fairer and more open society from the Conservative Party...

Executives who buy £1,000-a-plate tickets to a fund-raising dinner at the Conservative Party conference will get to sit with ministers. Despite David Cameron's pledges to bring transparency to party funding, the identities of the businessmen will be kept secret...

'Conspiracy theories finally laid to rest' by report on leaked climate change emails

Scientists involved in last year's "climategate" leaked emails controversy, which added to scepticism about the science of global warming, were not open enough with their data and unhelpful with requests for information, an independent review of the affair found yesterday.

They and their institution, the University of East Anglia (UEA), did not embrace the "spirit of openness" enshrined in the Freedom of Information Act, according to a long-awaited report into their conduct carried out by a panel of senior academics.

However, the review found that the researchers concerned, led by the Director of UEA's world-renowned Climatic Research Unit (CRU), Professor Phil Jones, could not be faulted for their "rigour and honesty as scientists", and there was no evidence that they had behaved in a way that might undermine the conclusions of the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

(from The Independent)