And so the Brexit campaign tells us how much better things would be if we went it alone. Well, let me share my own experience as a former Headteacher and bring some perspective and reality into the argument.
Apparently we constantly lose out financially by being in the EU. Not my experience.
My school was a relatively successful rural comprehensive in County Durham. As with many rural schools, we struggled each year to balance our budgets and were certainly not favoured by either central or local government. No Building Schools for the Future, Excellence in Cities or Action Zones funding for us! We were certainly losing out compared to other schools in the area.
With no capital funding available, I turned to Europe and twice successfully bid for funding, to build a Construction Workshop and a Virtual Learning Environment. These were not large sums – €120,000 and €150,000 – but it was money I could not access elsewhere. We ran four Comenius projects and a Youth in Action project with our European partners, averaging €25,000 per project, so bringing in a further €125,000 to the school. And then we also successfully bid for two European Social Fund projects to share our best practice with teachers elsewhere in the EU and this brought in a further €80,000.
And so, just looking at the financial benefits to my school, we received €475,000 that I would otherwise never have had.
But my intentions were never purely financial. There were clear educational benefits. Our construction workshop enabled us to offer a meaningful vocational option at Key Stage 4; the Virtual Learning Environment meant we could explore blended learning as a model of maintaining minority courses in the Sixth Form. Without this funding – courses such as Modern Foreign Languages would have been under threat and the Key Stage 4 offer would have been significantly weaker.
The European Social Fund projects enabled staff to share best practice and lead training in other countries, developing their own leadership skills along the way.
And then there were the Comenius partnerships. Our two STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics) projects led to an increase in students continuing to study Sciences in the 6th Form; our World War 1 project involved research, local history and community engagement; our Youth in Action project up-skilled local youth workers and significantly enhanced our out of school provision.
But it was our award-winning Construction project, which targeted some of our most challenging Year 11 students that had the greatest impact. A number were potential NEETS (young people Not in Education, Employment, or Training) and it was amazing to see how their experience of building work in Bulgaria brought out leadership skills we had never recognised, and led them to stay into training in FE and apprenticeships. These were real life-changing experiences and ones that addressed the wider agenda of STEM, NEETS and skills shortages.
None of this would have happened without access to European funding. The life chances of many of my students would have been greatly diminished without these opportunities, and having a constant stream of staff and students from other countries undoubtedly enriched my school.
And this funding is still available – through the Erasmus+ programme, which will bring €940m into the UK for education and training up to 2020, but schools need to apply for it. The numbers applying for funding are low and I am convinced that this is due to the constant anti-EU rhetoric and negative press. So, let us focus on the benefits and opportunities available to the education sector. Tell us, Messrs Gove, Johnson, Duncan-Smith, Farage and Galloway: What are the educational benefits of Brexit? You can bet your bottom dollar that if we came out of the EU, any savings made would not be invested in education, nor be available to poorer funded schools such as mine.
* Paul Harrison is a former headteacher and an external assessor of Erasmus+ for the UK national agency and EACEA the central agency in Brussels
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
Replacement?
Reform inadvertently lose their majority
The Major Oak is dead and Phil Harding has discovered another ancient site near Stonehenge
Reform own goals
Trumps' White House thuggery appals the world including most Americans
Peter Martin
Keith Creswell
David Allen
Kevin Hawkins
Andrew Tampion
28 Comments
“You can bet your bottom dollar that if we came out of the EU, any savings made would not be invested in education, nor be available to poorer funded schools such as mine”
A good article all round, but the last point is the most relevant. It could be argued (not incorrectly) that the money we receive only represents a proportion of the funds we pay in. No one argues that we are not net contributors.
The truth that so many Brexit supporters I talk to fail to see is that no Tory Government will really put that money into the NHS or Education. Words are cheap, and Boris is great at cheap words, but I keep trying to get people to look at the actions of this Government and previous Tory ones to see what they will actually do…
Actually, I would take this argument and make it forward looking. There will continue to be the small projects benefiting UK schools. However the extra support that is offered in the new EU countries will have a larger bang for you buck. The development and advancement of countries that are our neighbours and we have a co-dependency with. A richer Eastern Europe is good for the UK. The EU funds that are funded by the UK’s net contribution to the pot make them richer in the long term far beyond what they receive and we all benefit from a richer better trained European population. Our neighbours are our easiest markets, if they win we win.
Reflect on the fact that in their generosity in returning 270,000 Euros (equivalent) of British taxpayers cash to your school, the UK had to send the EU about 466,000 Euros (equivalent)?
But if you still think the EU gave you a good deal, then please send me a £20 note, and I will gladly send you a £10 note to go directly into the coffers of your school.
13 years of stagnating wages ?
@J Dunn
The thing is the EU at least send back the £10 the Tories will use it to reduce tax for their friends. When looked at like that the EU becomes quite attractive to us mere mortals…
@JDunn – You also overlook that the BREXIT favourite option of joining EEA is not without cost – some BREXIT supporters estimate it will be very similar to the net amount we currently pay to the EU, but without a seat at the EU table…
@JDunn. Actually the issue is not about money, but the fact that I could not have offered these opportunities without it and our Government and my Local Authority would not provide it. I’d rather focus on the benefits for those young people; students properly trained and contributing to the economy, more taking up Science, a shortage subject area and raised aspirations for the future. This debate is about our future not simply a balance sheet.
And yet if we didn’t give the money in the first place we could decide how to spend it. And if people vote for the Tories who don’t want to spend money on such things so be it. It might even make our own politicians accountable. I don’t remember being asked if I wanted Europe to spend it on these things
Can we get away from this idea that someone else makes decisions without us? We contribute to the decision making on how the money is spent through the European Parliament and the Council of Ministers and there are very very few occasions where decisions on spending have been made without the UK consenting.
Roland
“You also overlook that the BREXIT favourite option of joining EEA”
EEA is not the favourite, option of Brexit. It’s the option of a few mischievous liberals here on LDV, but it is an absolute non-starter as far as Brexit is concerned.
——–
Paul Harrison
“This debate is about our future not simply a balance sheet.”
Which begs the question why you submitted an article about how much EU recycled, British taxpayer cash you had accrued?
@Paul – “We contribute to the decision making” – contribute? How about unilaterally governing as an independent UK parliament?
“Spanish newspaper reveals flood of new EU legislation if we vote to Remain.”
https://twitter.com/EUAreKidding/status/744915057126039552
The net contribution for the EU by the UK is £116 per head per year, less than that paid by Sweden, Denmark or Finland. In return, the economic benefits such as access to EU markets work out at £1,225 per head per year.
If J Dunn thinks that isn’t a good deal and wants to send me £12.25 then I am happy to give them £1.16 back!
This fact comes to you courtesy of the “Wee Bleu Book” page 53 and available here…
http://www.scotlandineurope.eu/wee_bleu_book
My head wants remain and my heart is brexit, but I’m voting remain. I trust my rational thinking more than emotions. The arguments are heavily in favour of remain. The only thing I like about brexit is it will send a message to the liberal-left that they don’t run the country, which many seem to think is only a temporary blip.
My internationalist credentials are probably better than most, so when some pro remainers paint the brexit movement as isolationist or politically extreme it makes me think they don’t understand me.
@Eddie with respect (and not “looking for an argument”) – “My head wants remain and my heart is brexit,” – as a “democrat”, do you think that the UK should unilaterally be able to make its own laws, or be overruled by other powers?
http://www.blogs.spectator.co.uk/2016/02/michael-gove-why-im-backing-leave/
Hi Leave EU, being in the EU gives us a say on European laws too. So I don’t see it as being anti-democratic.
I’m not an undecided voter. I’ve decided I’m voting remain and I’m confident it is the right thing to do. I was just enjoying the polls last week saying brexit was ahead for reasons that I am not 100% sure about myself.
Regards
@Al
“The net contribution for the EU by the UK is £116 per head per year”
This “net contribution” I keep hearing about is a questionable concept. The EU may well spend money in the UK, but that doesn’t mean that UK taxpayers haven’t paid the money in the first place. It’s rather like claiming that nobody in the UK pays any “net” income tax, since the government re-spends all its income tax receipts.
It is of course absurd for Leave to ignore the rebate and claim that we pay £350m per week (their justification for this is nothing but a very poor attempt at sophistry) but it’s equally absurd to claim that the money spent by the EU can be deducted from our payments. Leave and Remain are both wrong on this – the true answer is somewhere in the middle (around £276m per week according to the BBC).
As far as I am concerned he could not get the money directly from the Tory ‘Academics’ system. He searched elsewhere, money arrived. He has done good things with it for the children in his care. A responsible headmaster would not matter where the money (legally) comes from to do the best for his school.
1870 war. 1914 war. 1939 war.
War between member states has not happened since 1945, despite lots of precedents.
Please do not say that NATO did this. NATO started in 1949, not all EU member states are also NATO members, NATO deals with external threats within the NATO area. The UK needs to belong to both.
‘the UK should unilaterally be able to make its own laws, or be overruled by other powers?’
Making laws is one thing, but implementing them practically is another thing.
External events have large scale effects to which our government can, at best re-act.
Many things including the environment, terrorism and crime know no boundaries, so the UK government needs close co-operation with neighbours to deal with these issues.
Much commerce and industry is globalised, so keeping them under control needs an authority wider than a single country.
In the EU, we have an established system for regular co-operation with our neighbours, with oversight by our democratically elected representataives and those they appoint. If we didn’t have it, it would require enormous cost and effort to replace it.
Richard Underhill.
Franco-Prussian war 1870
WWI 1914
WWII 1939
So basically the EU is protecting us from Germany!
I find so many remain supporters referring to European countries as our neighbours. Unfortunately, many people (40%?) especially older people do not feel we belong to Europe and the EU. MEPs cover such a big area they are so remote most people even forget they exist; I often have to remind people what they and the EU have done for our area, particularly when there were large sums available direct to communities from the EU without having to be sanctioned by our own government. I see this as part of the democratic deficit that needs to be overcome in our politics if we stay in.
Glenn 21st Jun ’16 – 10:31am No, this is only a brief comment. France declared war in 1870 and suffered the occupation of Paris. Neutrals such as Belgium were invaded. Germany was allied to Italy in WW2, Italy also invaded France.
NATO did not prevent the invasion of Egypt in 1956, which was not entirely successful, or the Cod War, which was farcical for non-fishermen, or the invasion of Grenada by the USA, without consultation.
Nigel Jones:
“I see this as part of the democratic deficit that needs to be overcome in our politics if we stay in.”
Absolutely. I know so many people who every election for the last few years, have shrugged in disgust, or denied knowledge it was going on, who are now voting in the referendum – and usually, voting for exit.
Democrats – and particularly Liberal Democrats – have to rethink and reinvigorate British democracy as a matter of urgency, whether we’re in or out.
People I have talked, to as I was posting leaflets, have put postal votes in a while ago and they have already voted to leave. I haven’t met many who admit they will vote remain.
More leave posters are in windows. Mine is the only ‘remain’ that I have seen.
Despite this I believe the tide has turned.
Prussia, under Bismarck pushed France into responding.
As for Egypt in 56, the EU hasn’t prevented any military interventions in the middle either in recent years either not even by EU members.
Japan, also not in the EU, hasn’t been war since 1945 either.
Glenn, you are deliberately misinterpreting Richard Underhill’s comment – he stated there has been no war between EU member states.
You are answering a point about there being no war engaged in by member states, which was not made or implied.
To pick up (again) the point people make about NATO…
It is clear to me that during the Cold War the EU (or rather EEC) and NATO worked in a complimentary way, NATO, primarily under US leadership working to restrict military action that would undermine the safety of the West, and to prevent a Soviet incursion into Western Europe.
The EU meanwhile, worked to promote democracy and promote common trade and mutual interest between democratic countries.
The US was happy for Spain under Franco and Turkey to be treated as allies, and allowed Turkey and Portugal – both then dictatorships – into NATO.
The EU would not accept Spain or Portugal as members until they had engaged in a transition to democracy.
I don’t see that US foreign policy was particularly bothered about this.
NATO as a miltary alliance, does have a significant role in preventing war in Europe, of course. But NATO has not and will never on its own inevitably and consistently protect democracy and human rights in Europe unless it is in the interest of its primary sponsor, the USA.
By contrast, the EU is a powerful institution to promote dialogue and common interest between European democracies, based on mutual trade and mutually intelligible legal and institutional frameworks — that is its foundational purpose.
Matt,
I was not deliberately misrepresenting Richards point at all. For a start attributing “peace in Europe” to the EU is itself very misleading as the EU was formed on November 1 1993. I also would point out that I never said anything about NATO so he was introducing an argument I wasn’t making.
Also Richard was responding to a tongue in cheek comment I made about the EU protecting us from Germany, which I don’t believe on the grounds that there is nothing to suggest Germany wants to invade anywhere! In truth I don’t think any of the Western Nations are even remotely interested in waging wars on each other whether they are in the EU or not.