A judicial review over the decision to turn Oak National Academy into a government quango has restarted, after its “detrimental impact” on competitors continued to grow.
The British Education Suppliers Association (BESA), the Publishers Association and the Society of Authors were granted permission to proceed with the legal review of the controversial quango two years ago.
They had argued that the decision would pose an “existential risk” to their sector, and that the conversion of Oak amounted to an “unlawful state subsidy”.
Before a trial was due to be held last year, the bodies confirmed they had “agreed to a stay of the proceedings”, while discussions with the Department for Education took place.
Talks fail
But today, they announced the legal action is back on, having found themselves “no further forward” since talks began.
“In fact, over the past 10 months we have seen Oak’s resources and its detrimental impact on commercial providers and educational authors continue to grow leaving us with no option but to continue down the path of legal redress,” they said.
This comes after the government published the findings of an independent review of the quango last week.
Among other things, it suggested a “refresh of the Oak branding and website, including potentially the removal of the ‘National Academy’ name, would reinforce [its] evolution”.
LocatED CEO Lara Newman, who led the review, also told DfE to review Oak’s “marketing and communications budget to ensure it is sufficient to deliver really good quality, consistent and engaging interactions with all potential user groups”.
She said Oak “already operates on a lean model” but recommended “a small level of further investment is necessary” to maximise the benefit of its “significant assets” and “increase the [government’s] return on investment”.
200% rise in Oak use
The upcoming curriculum review and senior departures, including chair Sir Ian Bauckham set to leave, “provides an opportunity to work with the outcomes of this report and reposition the organisation and its strategic aims”.
Newman also said Oak should “release materials on relationships, sex and health education as soon as new statutory guidance is available” and to “significantly refresh” parts of its website to make them “more engaging” for pupils.
Oak told the review “it stands ready to offer a full RSHE curriculum once new statutory guidance is available”.
A separate market assessment report, also published last week, reveals the government quango has impacted the domestic ed tech market, with competitors losing out on investment since its launch.
Latest usage data shows Oak was used by 182,775 teachers between July 2024 and February 2025. This represented a “206 per cent rise compared to the same period the previous year”.
BESA, the Publishers Association and Society of Authors noted the pause was agreed “in good faith to allow the findings of the market impact assessment and independent review to be properly considered” and for talks to continue.
‘Wall of silence’
Instead, they claim they were “faced with a wall of silence, reports with major implications for this issue published just a few days before legal action was due to resume, and still no indication that this government is willing to work with the sector to address our legitimate concerns”.
Newman’s review “has done little to answer the outstanding questions about legitimate public spending and the case for growth of an arm’s length body”, they continued.
“The independent review’s findings, if accepted, will put Oak on a footing which would see the arm’s-length body working even more closely with the [DfE], Ofsted and Ofqual.
“Government should be creating the conditions for teachers and schools to do this, not undermining their professional autonomy by force-feeding a centralised curriculum and pedagogy on schools that overlooks local needs and diverse communities.”
The DfE said it was “disappointed” the groups had decided to initiate “this costly legal action”.
Your thoughts