PA, SoA and BESA launch judicial review proceedings in relation to DfE’s current Oak National Academy plans

The Publishers Association (PA), Society of Authors (SoA) and The British Educational Suppliers Association (BESA) have launched judicial review proceedings in respect of the Department for Education’s proposed operating model for its new arm’s-length body, Oak National Academy. 

The three organisations are co-claimants, with the National Education Union also participating in the claim as an “interested party”. A formal judicial review claim was lodged with the court earlier this week. They say the move is a “last resort” after failed attempts to engage with the government. 

Judicial review is a type of court proceeding in which a judge reviews the lawfulness of a decision or action made by a public body. 

There have been growing concerns about the impact Oak National Academy, a new government arm’s-length body (ALB), providing free curriculum resources to schools, would have on the sector. The PA previously warned the move “risks causing irreparable damage to the commercial education resources sector” and ultimately "damage teacher choice and student outcomes". 

Speaking after the launching judicial review proceedings, Caroline Wright, director-general of BESA, said: “For decades, teachers have enjoyed the freedom of choice over how to deliver the curriculum supported by a dynamic and world-leading educational publishing sector. The Department for Education’s establishment of a new curriculum body poses an existential risk to the future viability of the sector which, in its current form, will result in an erosion of teacher choice over how to deliver the national curriculum. 

“Launching a legal challenge of the new curriculum body is the sector’s option of last resort, we have tried to engage with the Department for Education over its creation of its new curriculum body for months, but they have refused any meaningful mitigations that would protect competition within the market.” 

Dan Conway, c.e.o. of the PA, added: “At every step of this process we have sought dialogue and compromise and this development is a last resort that we very much wanted to avoid. Unfortunately, we and our joint claimants felt we had no remaining course of action other than to challenge the Department for Education’s plans via judicial review.  

“The government’s plans for Oak will be an unprecedented and unevidenced intervention that will cause irreparable damage to the education sector as we know it. The government is in effect creating a one-size-fits-all state publisher that promotes a single curriculum, controlled by the education secretary of the day. This will undo years of work by publishers who have invested expertise over many decades in creating a rich range of world-leading resources for school children across the country. 

“There is simply too much at stake to let these plans proceed unopposed. The potential impact on teacher autonomy, learner outcomes, and curriculum diversity and quality is too significant. That is why authors, publishers, educational suppliers, school groups, teachers’ unions, and others have all voiced strong concern over these plans.” 

Nicola Solomon, chief executive of the SoA, said: “Ever since the government first announced its intention to convert Oak National Academy into an arm’s-length body to the Department for Education, we have worked with our industry partners to raise concerns about the impact this will have on educational authors and publishers, and on the students and teachers who need the tools they create. This action is only necessary because the government has chosen to ignore those concerns. 

“If we don’t act now, educators will be left with one set of state-approved online resources which will threaten diversity and choice, remove financial incentives, and damage the healthy competition which is at the heart of educational publishing. The result will likely be a weaker overall pool of resources, greater challenges for teachers, and a negative impact on students’ learning.”