Lessons for saving schools

Glasgow council recently announced it's planned closure of numerous schools across the city. This article reflects on two previous campaigns against school closures, and attempts to draw out the lessons that can be reapplied in stopping these planned closures.

Glasgow City Council prompted a public backlask by announcing the closure of 28 primary schools and many nurseries.

The announced closures follow a public consultation exercise, in which the planned closure of many local primary schools was absolutely slated by parents and teachers across the city.

Due to the strength of feeling, parents in threatened schools had already began campaigning even before the decision was taken. [...] -- Burgh Angel, issue 2, (published winter 2006).

Educating a movement

Given that there is now a serious campaign on in many communities across Glasgow that has seen massive public meetings, direct action, and serious local press attention it is worth revisiting recent history.

In 2006 Glasgow faced a wave of school closures. A campaign emerged to fight the closures. The campaign was ultimately unsuccessful in most places. Last year in Edinburgh, the City Council proposed swingeing cuts of school services across the city. That campaign was successful. It's worth investigating the two "citywide campaigns", looking at the context for both, and seeing what lessons can be drawn for the current campaign.

Two campaigns

The campaign in 2006 in Glasgow built for a large demonstration in Glasgow's West End. Campaigners successfully got the campaign into the Evening Times in a number of favourable articles. The campaign had a small internet presence, The campaign also seemed well aware of the timescales for the final cuts decisions. There were also numerous parents (particularly mothers) across the city who had expressed a willingness to occupy their children's schools. Glasgow has a history of schools and public amenities which have been occupied by campaigners, resulting in those amenities being kept on. It also has a long history of important civic resources being lost without much of a fight.

The Edinburgh campaign had a number of advantages for a start. In the city there is a federation of community campaigns and residents groups, called Edinburgh at Risk. The campaign also had the support of the Labour party - a source of funds and commentators with computer time. The campaign also coincided with a public sector dispute, and received the backing of the unions. The campaign also received significant media interest. The campaign had a substantial internet presence. It was clear lots of sectors of society opposed the council plans. The campaign also had a number of parents prepared to engage in schools occupations. There was a discussion surrounding the campaign, and from the outset of the campaign about the tactics the campaign should pursue in order to win.

However when dealing in politics, allies are always useful. Shun no one (excepting, god forbid, if any organised religious sectarians or racists should appear) – from the far left through to members of the Labour and Conservative parties. The more political people onside, the more pressure can be brought to bear. Elected politicians are scared of losing votes to rivals – so play on that fear. And activists within the political parties that are closing the schools can make useful allies – they can lobby internally and bring up awkward motions and questions.

Political allies are allies only though, not leaders. It’s your campaign, not theirs. You’re here to save the school, not drum up votes and members for them. Use them, but don’t be used by them.

[How to save your school from closure, a pamphlet distributed during the campaign]

The Edinburgh campaign enjoyed better citywide communications, due in part to a more lively internet campaign, but also due to the campaign tapping into pre-existing institutions, and their networks. In Glasgow there was party political broad support for the campaign, altho the Labour Party controlled Council Committee taking the decision was in no threat of being outvoted. Things were different in Edinburgh, as the proportional representation for local government reform had led to a council based on a coalition of the Lib Dems and the SNP. Arguably now in Glasgow, things are even more institutiuonally sewn up against any political decision due to Glasgow City Council moving to an executive committee to carry out its decisions.

The Glasgow campaign however did face some element of political isolation. Those activists who formed the basis of the citywide campaign - those who sat on the co-ordinating committee, and those who related information from elsewhere across the city - drew almost exclusively from the SSP. There was broad support for the campaign, demonstrations organised by the campaign being attended by Lib Dem politicians, anarchists, CPB members, community councils and parents from across the city, The campaign however was in effect being directed by the SSP. In contrast in Edinburgh the number of groups and institutions that were involved in organising the campaign was much larger. The number of schools and nurseries in communities being affected (25 in Glasgow, 22 in Edinburgh) was roughly similar, but the Edinburgh campaign was able to involve a much larger section of people. In part the fact that the Edinburgh campaign tapped into pre-existing networks of communication, in part its greater number of existing networks and institutions brought more people into the campaign, in part the pre-existing bodies and institutions brought both experience of campaigning and legitimacy to the campaign, that fed through into the perception of the campaign as being winnable or strongly viewed as just, encouraging greater participation in the campaign from a wider array of people.

One story

There are two lessons to draw from here. Firstly, strong communications, transparency, and engagement are key to victory. Lots of factors play into developing those qualities. But achieving that dynamic for a campaign is key. Secondly having permanent organisations and institutions of working people in our communities and workplaces brought to bear on campaigns of this nature can bring a considerable force multiplier to the organisation, capacity, levels of experience and know-how shared throughout the campaign. It also affords us continuity in our organisations between our gains and our losses as working people in this country. We will know when things are getting better, because it will be us, in our organisations, putting them to rights, through campaigns such as the school closures fights and many others which concern the fate of our living and working environment and lives.

These two facts are drawn into starkness when the rationale for the school closures is investigated. In 2006, and last year in Edinburgh, the rationale for the cuts was of course (officially at least) cost savings. In private however (and not so privately!) it was suspected that land values and cashing in on property speculation had a great deal to do with the decisions. Now however this could hardly be said to be true. Property and land values have crashed to such an extent to rule out any such calculations. No. Now vital services are to be cut, to balance the books. Yes, surely the argument can be made that the council could prioritise schooling our children over attracting yuppies and companies to the city for the Commonwealth Games. The decision tho that cuts had to be made to balance the books is key however, when seen in context.

Prospects

As newsnight economics editor Paul Mason explains:-

"There's no austerity drive yet because the government has decided to borrow its way past the next election. The austerity will come later."

Indeed the same was explained on the Daily Politics show when a Treasury minister questioned by the presenter, could not deny that the Government's pre-budget report (based as it is on a picture now known to be decidedly too rosey) indicated that budget cuts would be more severe than any undertaken by the Thatcher Government. In other words this latest slashing of school services is just the beginning. Essential services are going to be reduced across the Board to pay for the economic crisis.

The context in which community campaigns are operating is now a very different one. Mass unemployment (now inevitable everywhere, and affecting many layers of society) is on its way, and now even senior and informed Government ministers such as Ed Balls, believe the present recession to be every bit as severe as that which followed the stock market crash. If that is the case we can expect disputes over closures of public service to be given the added dimension of people fighting tooth and nail to retain their jobs and livelihoods. We can also expect that the increasingly frontline nature of the cuts is likely too, to lead to increasing resentment, and increasing societal contestation as a result.

In this developing context, despite the fact that austerity measures are yet to be implement, we can already see growing resentment and anger. There have been increasing numbers of illegal strikes. The schools campaign in Glasgow today has a far greater head of steam than it did in 2006. There are just more people involved. But what we should bear in mind too, is that there are also warning signs that wider societal contestation, may not necessarily manifest itself as progressive struggles for change. Indeed it should be remembered that the Evangelical movement in the United States, the fascist movements that swept through Europe, and the Nazi racialist ideas that have become a touchstone for 'evil' in politics, were all birthed in the poverty and societal contestations of the great depression.

Preparing for austerity

In that context it becomes clear (given that we are soon to be hit with a wave of austerity measures that will surely invoke a calamitous public outcry), that the solutions of organising for improvements, and developing a civic sense of community, are likely to become all important. More than this though, what's clear is that the sense in which the Edinburgh victory was achieved, of tapping into a shared appreciation and skillset of campaigning experience, that drew on experienced community organisations and unions, is likely to become ever more vital. We are likely to see more occasion for campaigning of this type. If we want to ensure that we see more victories like those in Edinburgh we need to make certain that we have lasting organisations in our communities and workplaces that have experience of campaigning.

To draw this back to the Glasgow schools campaign, and how this applies to that, it's necessary to understand and implement the lessons of the Edinburgh campaign.

• We need to ensure that any groups of active campaigners that are fighting for their kids' schools do not lose that same impetus and civic engagement when the campaign is over. That enthusiasm for a better sustainable community life needs to be harnessed, and translated into permanent organisation.




• We need to ensure that any existing campaign groups and residents associations and committees are involved in the campaign, and that their skills and knowledge, capacity and contacts, are tapped into.




• We need to try to bring about a united permanent organisation to represent the residents associations and community committees which exist to represent their neighbourhoods, right across the city. That is key now to victory in every future campaign. We need citywide permanent organisation and communication.




• We need to ensure that Glasgow has a labour movement that is tapped into wider societal concerns. Social movement unionism, not contract focussed unionism that sees bargaining units as the start and end point of its sphere of influence, is the only way we are going to wither this crisis, and come out the other side of it with our lot improved. That means building an active and dynamic trades council. It means forging links with union branches and residents groups. It means developing the activist base of the trade unions.

Moving forward

Seen in this light, the Save Our Schools campaign of '09 is only part about the immediate social conflict. Yes, we want to save our schools. But the process of fighting back to save our schools and amenities, must also take a longer term view. We cannot again go into big campaigns, with nothing but an electoral strategy. In our current times that is not only irrelevant. It is worthless. What matters is our collective capacity to be able to campaign and force change. What matters is the power of ordinary people and our organisations. That is a question of the permanent mass organs and institutions of our class. That's what we need to focus on, and that's what we need to develop coming out of this campaign. If we do not have permanent mass organisations capable of fighting and winning, when those austerity measures do take place, then there will be no progressive solutions to offer people. Clearly today, no electorate is going to become enamoured of a social democracy, enough to vote one in, when there is no collective experience of organisation, or of things getting better. The only 'solutions' that will be sought in such a context will be revanchist. We should treat that as a salutory backdrop. Either we organise today, in our communities and workplaces, building collective experience of struggle, of organisation, and building collective capacity to take action in future, or we will lose. We cannot afford that. Our schools cannot afford that. Our community and societal facilities and our remaining elements of social support, cannot afford for us to do that. Our only available option here is to advance our collective organisations, not our party political advantages. Anything less is sectarian, will lose us another campaign and must surely be opposed.