The 2015 Conservative manifesto includes a section on localism and the ‘Big Society’. It describes “a vision of a more engaged nation, one in which we take more responsibility for ourselves and our neighbours; communities working together, not depending on remote and impersonal bureaucracies”.

The Education White Paper – “Educational Excellence Everywhere” – which was published on March 17th is at odds with this manifesto commitment. It advocates the transfer of the remaining 16-17,000 schools which are not yet academies (still the large majority as under 5,000 are academies or free schools) from local authority to independent control – or Multi Academy Trusts (MATs) as they have come to be known. Particularly worrying in the context of the manifesto’s advocacy of localism, it also proposes the removal of the long-existing requirement to include parent representatives on the governing bodies of schools.

As a long-time school governor and parent of a child in a secondary school which was a fairly early converter to academy status, I am not at all surprised by these reactions. The White Paper  clearly strips local stakeholders of power in terms of the running of their local schools. It will divert power towards the centre; to the DfE, its Regional Schools Commissioners and, in particular, to the Boards of multi-academy trusts (MATs).

It’s conceivable, of course, that enlightened MAT leaders who understand the power of local participation in education may allow parents and other local interests a say; the White Paper does not prohibit this, it just takes away the requirement for there to be two elected parents on local boards.

This has not been the case in most of the schools that have become academies so far, unfortunately; power has clearly been flowing away from local participants towards MAT boards and an increasingly bureaucratised Education Department (one of the reasons the DfE’s finances are now in a mess.)

The structure of school governance was created decades ago to bring local communities together, encouraging parents and other local stakeholders to take collective responsibility for their children’s education. It’s better if they have expertise to bring, of course, but even ‘inexpert’ parents bring commitment, a community ethos and a channel for democratic participation to a school. Who, after all, has a bigger stake than parents? We pay the taxes for these institutions and these are our children. The participative structure of school governance was a ‘Big Society’ idea before the term was coined.

My experience as the parent of a ‘customer’ of a secondary school which became an academy in 2012 has not been a very good one. A series of decisions were taken by the school which many parents have been unhappy with. Too late we realised that we had lost power and had no effective routes to complain under the new system. The local authority on whom we might have relied under the previous regime to look after our interests (and who we could un-elect if their actions displeased us) was no longer able to exercise direct influence either.

The ‘Big Society’ still exists in the local management of many of our schools. Let’s focus on working in our communities, in collaboration with other local schools and stakeholders in order to make our local school the best possible place for our children? Please can we work together to re-think these proposals before greater damage is done.

Neil Wallis is a former school governor and parent of two children at state schools, one an academy. He attends our Education Think Forum. The views expressed in this article are those of the author, not necessarily those of Bright Blue.