|
''Dimmock v Secretary of State for Education and Skills'' was a case heard in September–October 2007 in the High Court of Justice of England and Wales, concerning the permissibility of the government providing Al Gore's clime change documentary ''An Inconvenient Truth'' to English state schools as a teaching aid. The case was brought by Stewart Dimmock, a lorry (HGV) driver and school governor from Kent, England, a father of two sons who attend a state school. Dimmock has twice stood as a local election candidate〔("News from the New Party" ), 5 May 2007, New Party website〕 for the New Party and received backing for the case from Viscount Monckton, the author of the New Party's manifesto.〔("Please, sir – Gore's got warming wrong" ), Jonathan Leake, Environment Editor, ''Sunday Times'', 14 October 2007〕 Monckton, one of the UK's most prominent climate change sceptics, launched an advertising campaign against Al Gore in March 2007 challenging Gore to a public debate on climate change.〔("Monckton saves the day!" ), 6 May 2007, ''The Observer''〕 Monckton has received funding from a Washington-based conservative think tank of which he is chief policy adviser, the Science and Public Policy Institute (SPPI), to create a film, ''Apocalypse No'', which will parody Gore, showing Monckton presenting a slide show making an attack on climate change science.〔 The plaintiff sought to prevent the educational use of ''An Inconvenient Truth'' on the grounds that schools are legally required to provide a balanced presentation of political issues. The court ruled that the film was substantially founded upon scientific research and fact and could continue to be shown, but it had a degree of political bias such that teachers would be required to explain the context via guidance notes issued to schools along with the film. The court also identified nine of what the plaintiff called 'errors' in the film which were departures from the scientific mainstream, and ruled that the guidance notes must address these items specifically. ==Background to the case== In October 2006, the Government announced that the academic year 2006/07 would be a "Sustainable Schools Year of Action" to promote sustainable development and environmental consciousness. This followed an earlier public consultation on a Sustainable Schools Strategy. As part of the strategy, schools throughout the UK were to be given guidance and educational material on current environmental issues.〔"(Sustainable Schools Year of Action )". Teachernet, 3 October 2006〕 Ross Finnie, the Environment Minister of the Scottish Executive, announced on 16 January 2007 that ''An Inconvenient Truth'' would be shown to all secondary school pupils in Scotland, with the costs being underwritten by the energy company ScottishPower.〔Johnston, Ian. "(Man who wants to turn every Scots child into an environment evangelist )". ''The Scotsman'', 17 January 2007.〕 The Department for Education and Skills (DfES) followed suit on 2 February with an announcement that a copy of the film would be sent to all 3,385 secondary schools in England.〔Boone, Jon. "(Lessons plan may be undermined )". ''Financial Times'', 3 February 2007〕 A month later, the Welsh Assembly Government likewise announced that schools and colleges in Wales would receive a copy of the film. In all three countries, the distribution of the film was accompanied by guidance notes and resources on how climate change fits into the context of the National Curriculum〔"Schools to be given copies of Gore film". ''South Wales Echo'', 13 March 2007〕 and the Sustainable Schools Year of Action programme.〔"Climate change packs given warm welcome". ''Western Daily Press'', 7 May 2007〕 The DVD was also accompanied in English schools by a multimedia CD produced by the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs which included two short films about climate change and an animation about the carbon cycle.〔Camber, Rebecca. "(Schools must warn of Gore climate film bias )". ''Daily Mail'', 3 October 2007〕 The move was opposed by a group of parents in the New Forest region of Hampshire, who argued that the film was "inaccurate and politically motivated" and threatened to take legal action against the Government.〔Lightfoot, Liz. "(School row over Al Gore film )". 19 April 2007〕 The parents' spokesman, Conservative councillor Derek Tipp,〔Doward, Jamie. "(The man behind court attack on Gore film )". ''The Observer'', 14 October 2007〕 asserted that the circulation of the film by the Government amounted to political indoctrination and was in breach of the Education Act 2002.〔 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』 ■ウィキペディアで「Dimmock v Secretary of State for Education and Skills」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク
|