Sunday, August 26, 2007

And now – EU teacher training

Some teachers kick a ball or play at Blue Peter; others are exemplary pedagogical practitioners of the cerebral kind. But hitherto, their training and professional development has been monitored and controlled by various agencies ultimately accountable to the British Government and to Parliament. According to the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung (6 August 2007), the European Commission has expressed concern at what it says are severe gaps in the training and education of teachers in the EU. Their knowledge is ‘out of date’ and ‘inadequate’, for instance where the use of computers or their knowledge of language is concerned. The Commission has therefore suggested improvements to the teacher training programmes across the Union. The Education commissar in Brussels, Jan Figel, said that high levels of education were the key to Europe’s future competitivity (sic) and that highly-qualified teaching staff were necessary so that the European educational system could be successfully reformed. Mr Figer pointed out that ongoing training of teachers was the rule only in eleven Member States. Nowhere does this training consist of more than five days per year and in most cases fewer than twenty hours a year are set aside for teacher training. This is, apparently, insufficient.

Not content with infiltrating the curriculum of pupils, the EU is intent on manipulating the training of those who deliver it. The use of the ‘competitivity’ argument to justify Commission interference in an area which is obviously the preserve of the member states is an example of how the Commission will always find a way to extend its powers.

Along with today's Times, Cranmer demands a referendum on this whole EU project. It has gone too far.


Anonymous Voyager said...

Interesting to see His Grace keeping his German up to scratch...though I suppose meeting Margarete in Nuremberg back in 1532 helped with the irregular verbs.

He might well have seen Commissar Frattini calling on the German Government to ban the extreme-right party NPD....a strange intervention in domestic German politics when the German Supreme Court has already rejected this proposed ban once.

So we have the EU Commissars now intruing into domestic politics, and into domestic matters like Education. Initially they wanted to "harmonise" universities so that courses had a common platform throughout the EU and students could spend a semester sampling the delights of different locations as dilletantes in Germany were wont to do.

But it appears they want the Ideological Apparatus to inculcate correct values in teachers so they can churn out happy little New Europeans as they romp into the fields to harvest yet another bumper crop in the New European Nirvana.

26 August 2007 at 11:02  
Anonymous The recusant said...

I really do not want these people having any influence on the education of children any where let alone Germany.

26 August 2007 at 12:37  
Anonymous The recusant said...


these people

26 August 2007 at 12:38  
Anonymous nedsherry said...

I trust -- indeed, I know -- that anti-racism has been maximally prioritized in terms of key targets.

Along with today's Times, Cranmer demands a referendum on this whole EU project. It has gone too far.

Think so? In truth, you ain't seen nothin' yet.

26 August 2007 at 15:57  
Anonymous Voyager said...

Oh, so Your Grace gets fully apoplectic. The EU Commission intends to extend EU Employment legislation to the Self-Employed and to bring them within the ambit of The Working Hours Directive.....that should bring those GPs down to a 35 hour week

26 August 2007 at 16:10  
Anonymous Sir HM said...

There is much in here about EU ideas on education.

Extracts (substantial):

During a November 27, 1967 press conference, Charles de Gaulle stated openly that French cooperation with the Arab world had become "the fundamental basis of our foreign policy." ... Five years later in Paris, July 1974, the Parliamentary Association for Euro-Arab Cooperation was created, under the Euro-Arab Dialogue rubric.

This political agenda has been reinforced by the deliberate cultural transformation of Europe. Euro-Arab Dialogue Symposia conducted in Venice (1977) and Hamburg (1983) included recommendations that have been successfully implemented. These recommendations were accompanied by a deliberate, privileged influx of Arab and other Muslim immigrants into Europe in enormous numbers.

The recommendations included:

1. Coordination of the efforts made by the Arab countries to spread the Arabic language and culture in Europe, ...
3. The necessity of supplying European institutions and universities with Arab teachers specialized in teaching Arabic to Europeans, ...

The Euro-Arab Dialogue (EAD) is a political, economic and cultural institution designed to ensure perfect cohesion between Europeans and Arabs. Its structure was set up at conferences in Copenhagen (15 December 1973), and Paris (31 July 1974). The principal agent of this policy is the European Parliamentary Association for Euro-Arab Cooperation, founded in 1974. The other principal organs of The Dialogue are the MEDEA Institute and the European Institute of Research on Mediterranean and Euro-Arab Cooperation, created in 1995 with the backing of the European Commission.

Eurabia's driving force, the Parliamentary Association for Euro-Arab Cooperation, was created in Paris in 1974. It now has over six hundred members - from all major European political parties - active in their own national parliaments, as well as in the European parliament. France continues to be the key protagonist of this association.

On the cultural front there began a complete re-writing of history, which was first undertaken during the 1970s in European universities. This process was ratified by the parliamentary assembly of the Council of Europe in September 1991, at its meeting devoted to "The Contribution of the Islamic Civilisation to European culture." It was reaffirmed by French President Jacques Chirac in his address of April 8, 1996 in Cairo, and reinforced by Romano Prodi, president of the powerful European Commission, the EU's "government," and later Italian Prime Minister, through the creation of a Foundation on the Dialogue of Cultures and Civilizations. This foundation was to control everything said, written and taught about Islam in Europe.

... Dissidents are silenced or boycotted. Sometimes they are fired from their jobs, victims of a totalitarian "correctness" imposed mainly by the academic, media and political sectors.

... "It is a project that was conceived, planned and pursued consistently through immigration policy, propaganda, church support, economic associations and aid, cultural, media and academic collaboration. Generations grew up within this political framework; they were educated and conditioned to support it and go along with it."

The EU founders "were careful only to show their citizens the benign features of their project. It had been designed to be implemented incrementally, as an ongoing process, so that no single phase of the project would arouse sufficient opposition as to stop or derail it."

Booker and North call the European Union "a slow-motion coup d'état: the most spectacular coup d'état in history," designed to gradually and carefully sideline the democratic process and subdue the older nation states of Europe without saying so publicly.
MEDEA (the European Institute for Research on Mediterranean and Euro-Arab Cooperation), supported by the European Commission, is one of the key components of the Euro-Arab dialogue.

... the Common Strategy of the European Council - Vision of the EU for the Mediterranean Region, from June 19th 2000.

It includes many recommendations, such as:

"to elaborate partnership-building measures, ... Particular attention will be paid to the media and universities

One point in the document is particularly interesting. The EU wanted to "promote the identification of correspondences between legal systems of different inspirations in order to resolve civil law problems relating to individuals: laws of succession and family law, including divorce."

In plain English, it is difficult to see this bureaucratic obfuscation as anything other than an indicator that the EU countries will be lenient, adjusting their secular legislation to the sharia requirements of Muslim immigrants in family matters.

During the Euro-Mediterranean mid-term Meeting of Ministers of Foreign Affairs in Dublin in May 2004, the participants declared that:

" ... The EU can offer a more intensive political dialogue and greater access to EU programmes and policies, including their gradual participation in the four freedoms particularly the Single Market, as well as reinforced co-operation on justice and home affairs."

Again, exactly what does "co-operation on justice and home affairs" with Egypt, Syria and Algeria mean? I don't know, but I'm not sure whether I will like the answer.

The Barcelona declaration from 1995 encouraged "contacts between parliamentarians" and invited the European Parliament, with other Parliaments, to launch "the Euro-Mediterranean parliamentary dialogue." In March 2004, this was converted into a specific institution called The Euro-Mediterranean Parliamentary Assembly, EMPA (pdf). During the Euro-Mediterranean Ministerial Conference in Crete in May 2003, the Ministers included a provision which envisaged the consultative role the Parliamentary Assembly will play within the framework of the Barcelona process.

EU Commissioner Chris Patten has reiterated the European Commission's readiness to co-operate fully with the Assembly, giving the Assembly the right to comment on any subject of interest to the Euro-Arab Dialogue.

The Assembly consists of 120 members from EU countries, both members of national parliaments and of the European Parliament, and an equal number of representatives from the Parliaments of the Mediterranean partner countries.

Like most Europeans, I hadn't even heard about this institution before coming across it during an Internet search. However, it is apparently going to influence the future of my entire continent. This set-up leaves me with some questions. When we know that these "Mediterranean partner countries" include non-democratic Arab countries such as Syria, isn't it disturbing that representatives from these countries should participate in a permanent institution with consultative powers over the internal affairs of the European Union? Especially when we know that our own, democratically elected national parliaments have already been reduced to the status of "consultation" with unelected federal EU lawmakers in Brussels?

The Algiers Declaration for a Shared Vision of the Future was made after a Congress held in Algeria in February 2006. The document states that: "It is essential to create a Euro-Mediterranean entity founded on Universal Values" and that "It is crucial to positively emphasise all common cultural heritage, even if marginalised or forgotten." A Common Action Plan draws up a large number of recommendations on how to achieve this new Euro-Mediterranean entity. Among these recommendations are:

* Set up a network jointly managed by the Mediterranean partners in order to develop "a harmonised education system" [A "harmonized education system" between the Arab world and Europe? What does that include? Do I want to know? Will they tell us before it is a fait accompli?]
* Prepare action and arguments in support of facilitating the mobility of individuals, especially of students, intellectuals, artists, businessmen "and all conveyors of dialogue"
* Train teachers and exchange students between the North and the South and set up a network of Euro-Mediterranean Youth clubs
* Establish a "civil watchdog" anti-defamation observatory (with an Internet tool and a legal help network), to cope with racist remarks and the propagation of hate towards people of different religion, nationality or ethnical background

These agreements, completely rewriting European history books to make them more Islam-friendly, and gradually silencing "Islamophobia" as racism, are being implemented even now.

The Council was also actively involved in the co-organisation of a Conference on the Image of Arab-Islamic culture in European history textbooks, which took place in Cairo in December 2004. The event was held within the framework of the Euro-Arab Dialogue ''Learning to Live together.'' The aim of the conference was to examine negative stereotyping in the image of Arab-Islamic culture presented in existing history textbooks, and to discuss ways to overcome this stereotyping.

In the European Parliament, the German Christian Democrat Hans-Gert Pöttering stated that school textbooks should be reviewed for intolerant depictions of Islam by experts overseen by the European Union and Islamic leaders. He said textbooks should be checked to ensure they promoted European values without propagating religious stereotypes or prejudice. He also suggested that the EU could co-operate with the 56-nation Organisation of the Islamic Conference to create a textbook review committee.

In June 2005 in Rabat, Morocco, a conference was held on "Fostering Dialogue among Cultures and Civilizations." ... Among the recommendations that were raised by Mr. Olaf Gerlach Hansen, Director General of the DCCD: "We are interested in new actions in the media, in culture and in education. These proposals include:

... - Concrete initiatives for curriculum development through new educational materials and revision of existing textbooks.

... in its General policy recommendation n° 5: "Combating intolerance and discrimination against Muslims," the European Commission against Racism and Intolerance emphasized "Islam's positive contribution to the continuing development of European societies, of which it is an integral part." It expressed strong regret "that Islam is sometimes portrayed inaccurately [as] a threat."

The ECRI called on the EU member states to adopt measures that would effectively outlaw any serious debate about Islam and introduce pro-Muslim "affirmative action." European countries should:

* modify curricula to prevent "distorted interpretations of religious and cultural history" and "portrayal of Islam on perceptions of hostility and menace";

Early in 2006, the EU's human rights commissioner Alvaro Gil-Robles's criticized a plan to revamp Christianity as a school subject in elementary schools in Denmark. Gil-Robles said doing so went against European values. "Religion as a school subject should be a general course that attempts to give students insight into the three monotheistic religions ," he said. The "three monotheistic religions" means Christianity, Judaism and Islam.

As I see it, there are several possible ways of dealing with the issue of education about religion.

1. Teach the traditional religions within a particular country, which in Europe means Christianity and Judaism.
2. Teach all the major world religions.
3. Leave religion out of the curriculum.

What the European Union does, however, is to treat Islam as a traditional, European religion on par with Christianity and Judaism. This is a crucial component of Eurabian thinking and practice. Notice how EU authorities in this case directly interfered to force a once-independent nation state to include more teachings of Islam in its school curriculum in order to instill their children with a proper dose of Eurabian indoctrination. Notice also that they didn't ask for more teaching of Buddhism or Hinduism. Only Islam is being pushed.

Bat Ye'or agrees with Bawer's analysis "concerning the totalitarian web cohesion of 'teachers, professors, the media, politicians, government agency workers, talking heads on TV, the representatives of state-funded "independent" organizations like SOS Racism' to indoctrinate the politically correct. This perfectly expresses the political directives given by the European Commission to coordinate and control in all EU member-states the political, intellectual, religious, media, teaching and publishing apparatus since the 1970s so as to harmonize with its Mediterranean strategy based on multiculturalism."

Professional harassment, boycott and defamation punish those who dare to openly challenge the Politically Correct discourse. According to Bat Ye'or, this has led to the development of a type of "resistance press" as if Europe were under the "occupation" of its own elected governments. This free press on the Internet and in blogs has brought some changes, including the rejection of the European Constitution in 2005. Despite overwhelming support for the Constitution by the governments in France and the Netherlands and a massive media campaign by political leaders in both countries, voters rejected it. Blogs played a significant part in achieving this.

Only a few months later, EU authorities lined up together with authoritarian regimes such as Iran, Saudi Arabia, Cuba and the Chinese Communist Party in favor of "more international control with" (read: censorship of) the Internet.

According to Richard North of the EU Referendum blog, "The most dangerous form of propaganda is that which does not appear to be propaganda. And it is that form at which the BBC [the British Broadcasting Corporation] excels. Perhaps the biggest sin of all is that of omission. By simply not informing us of key issues, they go by default, unchallenged until it is too late to do anything about them."

Please, take the time to go read it all:

Personally, I want a referendum on this new treaty. Then I want a referendum on our membership of the EU as a whole. I will vote ‘no’ to both. The EU is dangerous.

26 August 2007 at 16:58  
Blogger Snuffleupagus said...

You are so funny Your Grace. Hmm yes, I can see what you mean. But it must be said that when it comes to education, various European countries are so much more sorted than we are. We are quickly becoming an international disgrace. So where you say in your 2006 post that Her Majesty's Government should be competent... I'm not quite sure that it is.

27 August 2007 at 14:49  
Anonymous Voyager said...

various European countries are so much more sorted than we are.

Your faith is touching but Germany has huge problems. Teachers are on average 50 years old and approaching retirement. Ethnic problems in Berlin, Cologne and other regions are causing conflict and violence.

Employers are protesting about low grade apprentices with poor German language skills, poor numeracy and a basic inability to communicate with others and lacking in social skills.

Several German teachers are killed each year by pupils toting guns.

The situation in Britain is simply more advanced than in much of Mainland Europe where compregensive schools came in later after Britain imported them from the USA, but NO other EU country has pursued monolithic uniformity of schools like Britain ie. universal comprehensive - other countries have a mix - diversity of provision

27 August 2007 at 16:11  
Anonymous prziloczek said...

I have given up on state education. I was a governor at our Comprehensive (1,500) until it was put into special measures. The government runs it for itself and has absolutely no regard for the parents or the children.
What difference the EU will make to all this, I do not know, except that it will mean a lot more time wasted and, no doubt, a lot more loonie ideas thrust onto the teachers (who are leaving in droves).
At the moment, I am trying to start up a small independent school - but don't hold your breath!

27 August 2007 at 21:25  
Blogger Snuffleupagus said...

Yes of course Europe has its problems. Though I had not realised that several teachers in Germany are killed every year with guns. But you say it yourself - our system is fundamentally flawed. Diversity of provision is everything. We don't even have a system that prevents children from moving to the next year if they have not reached that year's standard! The Europeans laugh at us and I understand why.

29 August 2007 at 15:37  
Blogger gatesofvienna said...


26 September 2007 at 12:56  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Newer›  ‹Older