Dear ,

The primary issue at hand is the early day motion "Software in
Education, number 179". The text of which is:

"That this House congratulates the Open University and other schools,
colleges and universities for utilising free and open source software
to deliver cost-effective educational benefit not just for their own
institutions but also the wider community; and expresses concern that
Becta and the Department for Education and Skills, through the use of
outdated purchasing frameworks, are effectively denying schools the
option of benefiting from both free and open source and the value and
experience small and medium ICT companies could bring to the schools
market."

This EDM reflects a strong current of opinion amongst small businesses
that are trying to supply the education market. It was difficult enough
before BECTA came up with this new approach, it is now all but
impossible for a company of less than 1000 employees with a global name
to even get to square one.

As you may remember I run a small software consultancy specialising in
Open Source solutions for SMEs. I already have a number of private
schools on my books. The likelihood of adding a state school the list
is virtually zero. There are a number of other companies in your
constituency very similar to mine, who have exactly the same problem.

BECTA's new lists of approved suppliers are very limited both in number
and variety; only fifteen suppliers for non-curriculum software for
example, none of which has any commitment to open source software.
BECTA's own case studies found considerable savings in cost for schools
using open source software. Government policy claims to promote a level
playing field for open source software.  This is not happening in
schools because BECTA's advice is partial and inconsistent.

So, in closing, I urge you to add your name to John Pugh's Early Day
Motion number 179, entitled Software in Education.

Yours sincerely,