I support Councillor Joyce Edmond Smith in her wariness towards city academies (Letters, November 4).

Why should there be different standards for these establishments which are, at the same time, less democratically accountable?

For example, it was only on September 28, 2005, that Education Secretary Ruth Kelly announced that qualified teachers working in academies would be required to register with the General Teaching Council, bringing them within the scope of its professional standards and regulatory framework, after pressure from teaching unions.

Why do we also hear nothing about city academies being required to close if they were to fail an Ofsted inspection?

In May 2005, Unity Academy in Middlesborough was found to be "fragile in leadership" and failing to give "an acceptable standard of education".

After three years, the school's percentage of pupils with five good GCSEs was 17 per cent, against a national average of 53.7 per cent.

The national Press also reported a recent Price WaterhouseCoopers report into the academies, which found that those academies which were improving were doing so no faster than many other inner-city schools.

At the same time, it was reported that questions about how academies account for their improvements could not be asked because the academies fall outside the Freedom of Information Act.

Business sponsors do not have to be resident UK citizens and, in return for a relatively small contribution, which can be deducted against personal Income Tax, they are entitled to a proportion of the public estate, which they can run indefinitely and without local accountability.

This seems to contradict the Prime Minister's rhetoric about giving back public services to local communities.

This is a wake-up call for those who care about the future of our children's education.

-Jean Southey, Brighton