Big Brother Borough

Most were shocked to hear of the antics of Poole Council.

It seems that a family who have a child at a particular school wished to have a second child at the same school. But they also wished to move. They explained their situation to the council and were told that so long as they still lived in their present home at the end of January both children could attend the school in September.

The family claims that they passed over at least one attractive house in the autumn in order to meet the residential condition.

They discovered, in further discussion with the council subsequently that the council had been mounting a surveillance operation on the family for nearly three weeks, to check that they still lived at their original address. One or more watchers followed the family car to school in the morning and from school in the afternoon, and then subsequently returned in the evening to watch the house until it seemed the family had retired for the night. The watcher(s) kept logs of all comings and goings and all signs of activity within the house.

The council authority for this was the 2000 Regulation of Investigatory(or investigative) Powers Act, which was brought in in part to improve national security. Any evidence obtained under the act may be used in criminal prosecution.

This morning the Daily Telegraph publishes evidence which suggests that activity such as that at Poole may be by no means exceptional. Last year, as revealed by the Surveillance Commissioner, local councils and government departments made 12,494 applications for "directed surveillance". This compares with a reduced figure of 19,000 from the police and other law enforcement agencies.

(Councils have admitted that they are using the Act for issues such a dog fouling, and anything else to which the term "illegal" may be attached.)

Whether this is a proper use of powers under the act is doubtful, as far as the act was intended, but the Poole case demonstrates something important.

If we no longer had a monolithic education system which is failing in large areas of the country, and an ideology which insists that every child must begin and end equally, many such problems would disappear.

If we had a Swedish-type education service, then popular schools would drive out failing schools. The latter would be replaced by new schools run on a better and different basis. Catchment areas and lotteries would be unnecessary. Snooping by councils, concerned about parents wanting to have all their children at the same (successful) school, would be unnecessary.