He is correct in thinking that the law should be changed, but this should be to empower governors by raising their status to that of a highly-regarded, trained group of valuable volunteers. Rogue or failing governors can then be more appropriately removed by their peers.
He also plays fickle with the notion of governors and their management role. Legally he may be right, but it is the pragmatic, regular involvement across the broad elements that make up "school life" that in actuality blurs the roles of some governors and some headteachers. This may not always be wrong.
In conclusion, he asserts that heads have a key role in the success or failure of their schools. That is known and accepted. What requires acknowledgement is that where the "legitimate aspirations" for schools are achieved, any reciprocal support should be acknowledged, where this has been contributory to such success.
I fear that, as with other negative but minority instances, Mr Hart is generalising a step too far.
TIM PESKETT Former primary head and co-ordinator for new governors in Northamptonshire 36 Edinburgh Road Northampton