I have been contacted by concerned constituents affected by the failure of Collective Spirit Free School following a social media post by its former CEO.

In the post it is claimed that the allegations made against those who ran the school were proven to be false. While the post does not state which allegations, it is important the record is put straight for the avoidance of any doubt. All the points raised here are supported by links to official sources.

I have decided to post this response, not to enter a back and forth exchange with anyone connected with the two schools, but to give assurance to former parents, pupils and staff who I have supported through their complaints, including over 100 people who signed a parent lead petition demanding an inquiry, and to the brave young people who submitted a personal impact statement.

This is a long post, but I hope anyone with an interest reads it through.

The complaints relating to the Collective Spirit Free School and Manchester Studio School are broadly in two areas; firstly, safeguarding and child protection failures, and secondly allegations of financial misconduct and corruption.

*SAFEGUARDING AND CHILD PROTECTION *

As with all allegations and concerns brought to me relating to safeguarding, they are reported as a matter of course, including cases relating to Collective Spirit Free School.

On the general complaints relating to safeguarding and child protection I can confirm that far from being proven to be false, the opposite is true.  Many failures were confirmed by Ofsted inspectors during formal visits to Collective Spirit Free School in May 2016 and to the Manchester Creative Studio School in March 2017.   

It was also clear, from a follow up Ofsted inspection to Collective Spirit Free School in November 2016 that the failures continued, stating that leaders and managers were not taking effective action, and that the action plan was not fit for purpose. On specific cases; one case relating to a former staff member is currently being investigated by the police and is ongoing.

Another investigation by a Safeguarding Partnership has concluded and now confirmed that the failure of the school contributed to the prolonged sexual abuse of a pupil by a family member.  Four other individual cases have been raised with the appropriate authorities along with allegations that DBS checks were not conducted, and allegations that the safeguarding register was falsified.

All these concerns have been reported formally and it is important that due process is followed.

*FINANCIAL MISCONDUCT AND CORRUPTION*

DEPARTMENT FOR EDUCATION REVIEW

On the allegations made on financial misconduct and corruption, it cannot be concluded that these allegations were proven to be false. What is not yet known, and what is required of the current ongoing investigation, is to discover the true scale of it.  What we do know is detailed in large part in the investigation conducted by the Department for Education which reported its findings in May 2019. I would encourage those with an interest to read the report themselves, following the link provided.  

The sample review looked at one of the trading companies which provided services to the schools; Collective Spirit Community Trust Limited, and the involvement of three individuals; Alun Morgan, Chair of Directors of both trusts; Raja Miah CEO of both trusts; and the former Chair of Collective Spirit Free School governing body Mohib Uddin.  

The allegations made by whistle blowers were that money was paid to connected companies which was not declared, and that some of that was for activity which was not carried out; essentially that they were fraudulent transactions. The investigation found that only £139,676 (27.7%) was declared, but  payments totalling £502,835 were discovered through the investigation. The allegation that payments were not declared was therefore proven to be true.

The investigation found there was a failure to manage conflicts of interest, that key trustees failed to declare connections, that transactions with a connected party were not adequately managed or sufficiently disclosed, that the board of trustees failed in their duties as company directors, that there was a failure to comply with the financial accountability system for academy trusts, including the relevant areas of HMT’s Managing Public Money and the Nolan principles which are selflessness, integrity, objectivity, accountability, openness, honesty and leadership.

What the review was unable to confirm, was whether the money was taken for activity which wasn’t carried out. It is not the case that this was proven to be false, but it said; “robust financial control systems, adequate financial oversight and relevant documentation to support contractual management and financial transactions by the trusts has impacted upon ESFA reaching any conclusion on the validity of funds paid to Collective Spirit Community Trust.” This was because contracts and invoices had either been removed or destroyed, or perhaps that they did not exist in the first place.

The review also found that operational staff were so concerned that they attempted to withhold payments, and that correspondence confirmed staff had questioned why invoices were being submitted when there was no evidence that activity had been carried out. An instruction to make the payment was made by Mohib Uddin. The Education and Skills Funding Agency requested assurances that outstanding payments were compliant with the rules, this assurance was provided by Mohib Uddin in writing.

It concluded that these assurances were inadequate, given what was discovered and suggested that Mohib Uddin had potentially breached directors’ duties under the Companies Act 2006, by failing to act in the best interests of the trust.

Despite staff raising concern, both Alun Morgan as Chair of Directors and Mohib Uddin as Chair of the governing body confirmed to the investigation that no specific work had been conducted by themselves or the boards to investigate staff concerns relating to invoice increases and potential lack of delivery of certain services.

The report suggests that this is a potential breach of rules governing academies and free schools which states that trusts must take appropriate action where fraud, theft and/or irregularity is suspected or identified.  What stood out as being odd, was that on interview, the Chair of Directors, Alan Morgan who stood as a 50% shareholder of the company said he had ‘limited knowledge of being a shareholder.’

It was alleged that the leadership of the schools made attempts to avoid declaring interests, for instance standing down from positions which required them to declare interests, but in truth, had maintained control in the background. The review found that the former CEO, Raja Miah resigned as a director of both trusts in 2014, but continued to attend board meetings with minutes presented confirming he would have oversight for finance and governance. It also found that he had clear connections with the company including personally chasing payment from the school as late as 2017.

Further, the investigation found that staff and new governors reported that school owned IT equipment was retained by former trustees long after their involvement had ceased.

WHAT REMAINS OUTSTANDING

What is important to recognise is that even with this limited review, there remains significant questions directly relating to the former CEO, Raja Miah and others.

These include a range of companies and individual payments which did not form part of the Department for Education review, these include Collective Community Partnerships UK C.I.C. whose sole shareholder was Raja Miah, and which declared payments of at least £485,258. Social Mavericks LTD, again sole shareholder Raja Miah, which declared payments of at least £240,622. Rise 2010 CIC which declared payments of at least £45,583 and Raja Miah individually with direct personal payments of at least £163,229. It is essential that these companies are subject to the same review as Collective Spirit Community Trust Limited.

There are several other companies, some of which have a clear connection, some of which are less clear, which require investigation. Because these have not been covered by official reports, I will not publish them, it is important due process is followed. I am also mindful that in the midst of the complicated web of companies and transactions, some innocent people will be caught up in it, and they should be given the benefit of the doubt.

Across all similar activity paid out of the two schools it has been asked that transactions of £2.8m are considered for a full review.

VAT FRAUD

Allegations were also made that the Manchester Studio School was used as a host address for VAT fraud. It was confirmed that in invoicing for services, Morgan Bristol Limited, had obtained the VAT number of a company with a similar name to invoice for services provided to Oldham Council. The £31,090 fraud was discovered after whistle blowers came forward.

It was also confirmed that the actual address used; 70 Henry Street, was not listed on the Royal Mail address database, but is the side steel fire exit door of the Manchester Creative Studio School. This address was also used by other companies.

FURTHER INVOLVEMENT IN SCHOOLS

It was reported by Schoolsweek newspaper that Alun Morgan, Raja Miah and Mohib Uddin had been blacklisted from further involvement in schools, but despite this Raja Miah established The Supply School Ltd, providing supply teaching staff to schools.

Lord Agnew, an Education Minister at the time, confirmed in writing that he remained concerned that the future involvement of the three individuals named within the report. He went on to confirm that he had written to them making that position clear. In addition, he confirmed that he had instructed Regional Schools Commissioners to inform him directly should they become aware of any further involvement of the three named individuals within schools in their region.

There is much more, which because this has already been a long post, I will not go into the detail here, not least of all because I believe in due process and they need to be fully investigated first. Needless to say, any suggestion that allegations surrounding financial conduct could be considered to have been ‘proven to the false’ is far from the truth.

SOUTH CHADDERTON SCHOOL

The post also references that the site of the former South Chadderton School was; “’promised’ in a land deal to one of these “shadowy associates.” This defamatory comment, like many others made over the past year and a half, is purely an attempt to deflect my legitimate challenge on this case.

It is a matter of fact that on the merger of South Chadderton School and Kaskenmoor School to create the Oasis Academy that both sites would be redeveloped, with the income allocated to the Building Schools for the Future Project. It is categorically not the case that the land was promised, let alone with anyone who could be considered ‘shadowy’. Again, and for the avoidance of doubt, my only involvement in any aspect of the South Chadderton site since becoming an MP has been both to ensure the vacated school was returned back to the council, and taxpayers of Oldham, and that Whitegate End Primary School had continued use of the playing field.

FINALLY

Finally, in taking this case on, no one could have foreseen the vengeance that would follow from Raja Miah and his associates. I know many decent people have been attacked, had their character dragged through the mud, and felt threatened and deeply affected by his actions. I know too well the impact this can have and the toll it can take, and I hope you know that while I am deeply sorry for the abuse you are going through, I would still pursue this case, even knowing now what was to follow.

Politics is about people; and the pupils, parents and staff who have asked me to be their voice matter to me. I have no intention of letting them down.

Of course, what follows is now for the authorities to pursue. I sincerely hope they do so without fear or favour.

Jim McMahon OBE MP

Member of Parliament for Oldham West and Royton

INDEPENDENT LINKS

*Department for Education review published May 2019* https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/investigation-report-manchester-creative-studio-and-collective-spirit-free-school

Findings from the visit and subsequent work beyond that identified a number of significant failings in both the governance and financial control arrangements, including several breaches of the regulatory framework governing academy trusts. These include:

1. Failure to manage conflicts of interest resulting in a breach of AFH 3.1.12
2. Key trustees failed to declare connections with CSCT breaching the AFH 3.1.13
3. Transactions with a connected party (CSCT) were not adequately managed or sufficiently disclosed in the 2015/16 financial statements resulting in a breach of AFH 3.1.14 and the Academies Accounts Direction
4. Failure to establish a control framework that recognises public expectations about governance, standards and openness, a breach of AFH 2.3.2
5. The board of trustees failed in their duties as company directors as set out in the Companies Act 2006 to: avoid conflicts of interest declare interest in proposed transactions or arrangements exercise reasonable care, skill and diligence
6. Failure to comply with the financial accountability system for academy trusts, including the relevant areas of HMT’s Managing Public Money and the Nolan principles – AFH 1.1.2

*Manchester Creative Studio School published in March 2017* https://files.api.ofsted.gov.uk/v1/file/2677777

1. Governors do not fulfil their statutory safeguarding duties. Governors’ policies, procedures and practice are ineffective
2. The arrangements for safeguarding are ineffective.
3. There are serious failures in relation to safeguarding arrangements. Leaders do not adhere to their own safeguarding policies and procedures.
4. Where incidents occur, senior leaders do not share the information that they have with each other so that appropriate action can be taken.
5. During the inspection, inspectors received information relating to the well-being and safety of pupils in the school.
6. The concerns raised by a number of pupils and staff during the inspection are now being examined by the appropriate bodies.
7. Leaders do not record safeguarding incidents appropriately.
8. They do not have sufficiently detailed records of incidents that take place in the school or of the subsequent investigations that they undertake.
9. Leaders do not routinely undertake health and safety checks to ensure that students in the sixth form are safe at their work experience placements.
10. Pupils receive information about radicalisation and extremism. However, leaders do not ensure that, should it occur, pupils would know how to recognise the signs of radicalisation in their own lives.
11. Leaders do not monitor the effectiveness of online filtering systems and governors do not receive reports on the how effectively their systems keep pupils safe when online. Consequently, leaders and governors do not know whether the school’s filters are age appropriate and whether they effectively protect pupils from inappropriate content.
12. Nearly half of parents who responded to Parent View, Ofsted’s online survey, think that pupils are not safe in the school.
13. Current safeguarding arrangements do not allow leaders to engage effectively with parents and other stakeholders.
14. Pupils think that there is a culture of ‘turning a blind eye’ to issues that arise in the school.

*Collective Spirit Free School in May 2016*

https://files.api.ofsted.gov.uk/v1/file/2578127 1

1. The arrangements for safeguarding are not effective.
2. While procedures for child protection, risk assessment and health and safety are in place, the policies for safeguarding and child protection and attendance displayed on the school’s website are out of date.
3. Pupils who the lead inspector met formally and informally said that they did not feel safe from bullying and fighting around the school and parents agree.

---

Christmas is going to be different for us this year, so I’m going to try something a little bit different too.

This year I want your help in putting together my online Christmas card, I want you to send me your best pictures of the constituency.

They don’t have to be recent, but they can’t be taken off the internet! I’ll be looking for 3 photos overall, one for Oldham, one for Chadderton and one for Royton. And I’ll pick an overall winner from those three.

To enter send me the photo and a brief description by email to jim.mcmahon.mp@parliament.uk, with the subject line ‘Christmas Card Photo’ by Sunday 13th December.

And yes there will be a small prize for the three winners, but it shall remain a surprise.

Do share and let your friends know!

On Tuesday 3^rd November, Oldham West and Royton MP, Jim McMahon, hosted three virtual Parliament Week events with young people from across Oldham. Over the course of the afternoon Jim was joined by Year 7 pupils from The Radclyffe School in Chadderton, a mixture of Junior and Senior pupils form Oldham Hulme Grammar School and rounded up the day by attending a virtual meeting with the Oldham Youth Council.

UK Parliament week is an annual festival that seeks to engage people from across the UK with their Parliament, explores what it means to them and encourages them to get involved. This year marked ten years of Parliament Week and provides an important opportunity to be part of the UK’s democracy and look to the next ten years. Community groups, local organisations and schools across Oldham West and Royton have signed up to take part in events this week.

Jim said, “I really enjoyed my opportunities to talk to young people from across Oldham about what it means to be an MP and how our Parliament works yesterday afternoon.”

“As a longstanding campaigner for Votes at Sixteen I know just how vital it is that we get our young people involved in our democracy and I’m so glad so many groups have signed up to take part this week.”

“Unfortunately, I can’t join all of for the same questions sessions we’ve had with Radclyffe, Hulme and the Youth Council, but I am almost certain there will be lots of interesting and engaging events taking places virtually.”

“I’d encourage all schools and youth groups to go to the UK Parliament Week website and just have a look at the wealth and range of activities available. It’s not all boring talks and presentations, there are some fun games and activities to play as well.”

• 

• 

Oldham West and Royton MP Jim McMahon has written to the Health Secretary asking him to apply some common sense to Oldham’s local restrictions. In his letter to Matt Hancock, the Oldham MP states that ‘there is real confusion about the complexity of the rules applied to differing areas’, the letter contains two key asks.

Firstly, that the government rationalises the rules around guests at funerals so that 30 people can attend in Oldham as they can elsewhere. Secondly, that people in Oldham be allowed to meet their friends and family outside with social distancing in place.

Speaking after the letter was sent Jim said, “The patchwork of restrictions is a mess, it doesn’t make sense to me or to any of my constituents that there are places in Greater Manchester with a higher infection rate than ours but they are subject to different restrictions.”

“When the government changed the guidance nationally they recognised just how distressing funerals are at the moment, and whilst they changed the limit on the number of guests at weddings, the number of attendees at a funeral stayed at 30.”

“But in Oldham it’s even lower at 20, I don’t think it’s at all unreasonable to ask that Oldham is brought into line with other areas and we show a bit of compassion at the moment.”

“The pandemic has been hard for all of us, not being able to see our friends and family for months and then having to keep up with changing restrictions. Since the social lockdown was introduced in Oldham five weeks ago our infection rate has trebled so my constituents are rightly asking that whether they are having any impact.”

“So allowing people to meet outside, with social distancing and other appropriate common sense measures in place, will be good for our mental and physical health.”

“All future measures must be supported by the evidence, otherwise people are just going to continue to be confused. I’m not arguing that Oldham should be released from all of the extra-restrictions, it’s clear from the infection rates that we do have a problem but we also have to be realistic and recognise that these measures need to be clear and make sense to people otherwise they just won’t trust us.”

MY first and main responsibility in Parliament is to give a voice to people in Chadderton, Oldham and Royton, and that means always being willing to take on the government if they are failing our community.

What is clear, that aside from the chaos that surrounds the messaging on Covid, and the confusion on what restrictions apply in different areas, is that the “machine of government” worryingly seems to have ground to a halt.

Over the last few weeks, I’ve asked the government a number of questions relating to Oldham and the government’s Covid-19 response. There is often no indication of when we’ll get an answer beyond “as soon as it is available”. This has been the case when asking how many tests have been carried out in each part of the country, which shouldn’t be that difficult.

The system is a mess, and the government must surely know it when Oldhamers are sent as far as Sheffield, Leicester and even Scotland for tests, when we have many pop-up centres locally, many within walking distance.

It became even more bizarre when members of parliament from all over the country lined up to point out that their constituents couldn’t get a test locally, but they could apparently travel to Oldham for one. It is unbelievable that the government appears to be unaware that this is happening.

For some time now, I have been highlighting the importance of the risks to people in certain jobs in our fight against Covid-19. Certain industries and roles are at a much higher risk of contracting and even dying from Covid-19, so, I asked whether the Department for Health and Social Care would publish occupational data for those testing positive.

The simple version of the answer I got was: No, the government wouldn’t be publishing the data because it requires “careful assessment” to make sure it is accurate. Basically, they just didn’t know.

Not knowing this will seriously hamper our ability to get ahead of the virus and contain outbreaks before they become a serious issue. This is why I wrote to the Health Secretary two weeks ago asking him to make sure users submit occupational data upon booking a test through the national system.

I asked the Treasury what impact assessments have been done regarding the end of the furlough scheme in October, the Chancellor’s one-size-fits-all approach could be devastating and withdraw support from thousands of jobs in Oldham West and Royton before they even have chance to recover.

The answer the Treasury Minister provided did not even attempt to deal with the question I posed, no mention of the economic impact that this would have. It would be deeply worrying if the Treasury has not considered the potential impact that pulling the rug from under these jobs would have.

If all that was poor, the head of the test and trace system gave evidence to the Select Committee, where she said that they were surprised by the increased demand for testing as schools returned. It’s a good job she isn’t the Christmas buyer for the local toy shop, there would be a lot of unhappy kids in Oldham. But this is far more serious, literally a matter of life and death.

The government just does not have the answers to questions it really ought to know. Oldham cannot afford to be let down because of the incompetence of ministers. We are making enough sacrifices here in Oldham and we need the government to pull their weight too.

We know the Prime Minister isn’t big on details, he has displayed that continuously, but we really need the rest of government to step up. We have had enough mixed messages over the last six months. Now is the time for clarity and the time for answers.

Finally, you do have to take the wins; and this week a big one came for local people, after a month of lobbying we finally got the government to realise the folly of the restriction of family members looking after children, especially when they issue a call to return to work. It’s a small win but important to support working people with children who depend on family to help with childcare.

The Education Policy Institute’s 2020 Annual report on the state of education in England recently found that the attainment gap between disadvantaged pupils and their peers in Oldham has barely improved since 2012.

The study finds that when compared to non-disadvantaged pupils nationally, disadvantaged pupils in Oldham are up to five and a half months of learning behind in the early years, nine months behind at primary school and by the end of secondary school a mammoth nineteen months of learning behind their peers.

Commenting on the findings of the report, Oldham West and Royton MP Jim McMahon said, “These stats are really quite troubling, for the first time in ten years the national attainment gap has stopped closing. This loss of momentum could have a really devastating impact on closing it again in the future.”

“We can’t afford to be pushed back in this fight, government should be doing everything it can to eradicate this gap completely. But as we saw with the recent A-Level results fiasco and we narrowly avoided with GCSE’s thanks to another U-turn, government seems unwilling to grapple with the reality for disadvantaged pupils.”

“It’s not fair that by the end of secondary school disadvantaged pupils in Oldham are over eighteen months behind their peers. The attainment gap at all levels of education in Oldham has barely improved and for early years has actually increased by over a month. The findings in this report do not yet take into account the damage that the Covid-19 pandemic has had on our education system, there will be a lot of hard work to in catching kids up anyway.”

“Oldham already has the highest rate of child poverty in England, with nearly forty percent of kids living in poverty and kids in Oldham being six times more likely to live in poverty than those in wealthier areas of England.”

“We were supposed to benefit from the Opportunity Area Fund, but stats like these show that it has failed to bring about the sustained improvement that our town needed. Education is supposed to be a route out of poverty, but with attainment gaps this large our kids don’t have a fair chance.”

“After a lost decade of Tory austerity and our education system facing a funding shortfall of £12m this year alone, whilst the government wasted money on failed free schools and the failed university technical college in the past, we should be wary of sound bites about levelling up. They have been in government for ten years and have had plenty of opportunities, their failed experiments have already played havoc with pupils’ education.”

• 

• 

Oldham West and Royton MP Jim McMahon has this morning written to the Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, The Rt Hon Matt Hancock MP, detailing three key asks based on Oldham’s experience of dealing with Coronavirus.

In the letter Mr McMahon asks the Health Secretary to urgently reconsider the way the Department collects the data of those working in high risk occupations and repeats his call for routine workplace testing to get ahead of any outbreaks. The third and final ask is regarding childcare, an issue that many constituents have been in touch with Jim about given the social restrictions here in Oldham. Jim asks that the Department reviews the restriction which prevents extended family members to provide childcare to support parents going back to work.

Commenting afterwards Jim said, “We’re more than six months into the pandemic now and it’s time for us to start looking at the lessons we’ve learned along the way to better improve our response.”

“One thing that’s clear to me is that our efforts to build a robust evidence base on the source of transmission is being hampered by the lack of occupational data being collected. Simply making this information be a required point when interacting with the online booking system would give us a much clearer picture of high-risk occupations.”

“Just knowing that certain occupations are high-risk is only the beginning of the story, and so we urgently need to start doing routine testing in the workplace to find any cases before they spread and cause a spike. One of the things I picked up whilst out with Team Oldham was that many people working in transport, retail, factories and warehouses just hadn’t been tested yet and that can’t be allowed to continue.”

“My email inbox has been full of questions from constituents asking how they’re supposed to get back to work, as the government is encouraging everyone to do, if members of their extended family aren’t allowed to offer the support they usually do. Childcare can be expensive and unpractical with the shifts that people work. I think that this restriction, as a result of it being impractical, is not being observed and is undermining the basis of other restrictions too.”

I’ve been thinking about this story a lot since I read it on Sunday, and it has left me with a few thoughts. Oldham needs levelling up, and that means investment not withdrawing support. Ending the furlough scheme in October will be a mistake that could potentially devastate our town even more.

Data from the House of Commons Library shows that there are fourteen thousand jobs – which works out at around 30% jobs – in Oldham West and Royton ‘furloughed’, the pandemic will not have gone away in five weeks’ time when the scheme draws to a close. What we do know is that many people on low wages, as unfortunately too many people in Oldham are, are extremely vulnerable at the moment, the Office for National Statistics shows that less than 10% of the lowest paid earners can work from home.

I do not understand the thinking behind the government’s one-sized-fits all approach, there are certain industries that cannot, with social distancing and with government imposed limits on attendance, get back up and running at capacity. What does government expect these workers to do once the furlough scheme ends?

Since March those claiming unemployment benefits here in Oldham West and Royton has doubled to just under seven thousand people. It’s not out of the question to say that come October it could double again, or even worse: triple.

Surely someone in the Treasury, someone in Government recognises that these people will then need support from the government in one way or another. Is it not better to keep providing this support, to keep people in jobs for a while longer rather than having to deal with a sudden increase to the number of people claiming universal credit?

It’s worth reminding ourselves at this point that universal credit is not a simple system, it has not been designed for ease of access. Since it’s rollout my office and I have been helping constituents battle through the process, and the same is true over the last few months. We have seen too many instances where constituents have lost their job or self-employed people have been ineligible for support and Universal Credit – the system designed to be our safety net has failed them – how many more times will we see that if 30% of the town suddenly lose their jobs?

We know that retail outfits are struggling, Debenhams (one of the last big anchor brands in the Spindles shopping centre) is at risk of going into liquidation, Boots have been making job cuts, and these are major businesses there will be countless other smaller and medium businesses who have fallen through the gaps of all the schemes across our town for whom reopening and carrying on as before is not an option.

Our retail, manufacturing and hospitality sectors will need time to get back into anywhere near a healthy state, the October cliff edge for the withdrawal of the furlough scheme will not help these sectors. It is time for government to think again, to tailor it’s approach to the sectors and employers that need help still.

We are already in the middle of a job’s crisis; government can prevent it getting worse. There is no magic solution to the problems our town faces, and there is certainly not going to be an oven ready, one-sized fits all approach that works in Oldham and works in the other nine towns in Greater Manchester.

Place matters and communities’ matter, Oldham was already struggling with a fragile economy before the pandemic. To remove the props and push us off down the river would be unforgivable.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/aug/23/covid-job-losses-could-widen-englands-north-south-divide-study-labour