DCSF Rocked by New Open Letter and Lead Report in The Times on EYFS ‘Concessions’


The Times newspaper leads today with an article featuring Open EYE‘s less-than-impressed response to the DCSF’s new labyrinthine and unduly complex exemptions procedure. In the same issue, the letters page also features a new Open Letter orchestrated by the campaign’s Richard House, Graham Kennish and Kim Simpson, following our first letter published in The Times last November. This new Open Letter makes the case that the government’s recent alleged ‘concessions’ amount to little more than ‘crumbs thrown at the table’, and leave in place mandatory early-years practices which are widely believed to be inappropriate for many children. The letter is signed by over 80 notables across education and related fields, including such prominent figures as:

Sir Christopher Ball, Steve Biddulph, Professors Tim Brighouse, Pat Broadhead, Tricia David, Rita Jordan, OBE (Emeritus), Lilian G. Katz (USA), Susie OrbachPat Petrie and Sami Timimi – and Jean Liedloff, Alfie Kohn, Dr Penelope Leach, Michael Morpurgo OBE, Philip Pullman, Sue Palmer and Tim Smit.



2 Responses to DCSF Rocked by New Open Letter and Lead Report in The Times on EYFS ‘Concessions’

  1. alan Bowles says:

    I think this letter is much better focussed on the current issues . is there a way we could sign up to this current position independently of the original petition

  2. Liz says:

    It’s awful to say it but I may suggest if the Government are prepared to ignore experts, professionals and parents and continue with the LGs in their present form that perhaps there is a call for another way forward on this issue as what the Government are asking is child abuse. I don’t think our children should be allowed to be abused in this way and people have fought long and hard using democratic procedures. If all the signatories stand together and refuse to tick the points that are required for the LGs and ignore them I cannot see how they could possibly close all the childcare settings. Also if all parents who feel they have found the right kind of approach and philosophy from their childcare provider grant verbal and written permission to ignore the LGs then en masse this could go to court because the Government are asking something that goes against the European Human Rights Act as they are ignoring parental wishes etc.

    I don’t for a minute believe that everyone in OFSTED etc is behind the Government on this. I feel their hands are being forced too; many unions disagree with it and I’ve yet to meet a childcare practitioner who would agree to it all without some kind of artistic loophole finding in terms of when they tick off things. Yes there are parents and children who would and could meet all the requirements and wish that to be the case and that is fine but there should be diversity in childcare approaches, philosophies and settings. If the Government (and again I don’t believe for a minute half of them even understand the EYFS – my own MP has refused to get involved because he doesn’t seem to understand anything relating to children half the time) really won’t listen then maybe they will listen when childcarers use practical means of ignoring the silly part of the EYFS and they find that children in fact are not mass-manufactured and cannot be forced into boxes.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: