Legal battle on Gore climate film

Al Gore's film won two Oscars

A parent is urging a judge to reconsider a ruling that the government did not break the law when it sent schools copies of a film by Al Gore.

Stuart Dimmock, a father from Kent and a member of the New Party, is at London's High Court.

In late July, a judge there ruled that the decision to send the climate change film "An Inconvenient Truth" to England's secondary schools was lawful.

Mr Dimmock had argued that circulating the film amounted to indoctrination.

But the judge, Mr Justice Beatson, ruled: "The fact that the presenter is a public figure and active in US politics does not arguably make the film as a whole one of political indoctrination.

"Nor does the showing [of] it in an educational context as a supplement to other teaching methods, and accompanied by suitable reservations and indications as to what is political and controversial, arguably the 'promotion' of partisan political views."

Political issues

Schools in England are being sent a copy of the film by the former US vice-president in a package of resources for use in science, geography or citizenship lessons.

The Welsh assembly government and the Scottish Executive have also made plans to give the film to schools on DVD.

In his original ruling in late July, the judge said the guidance had been put together by an expert panel.

He said it reminded teachers of their statutory duties, "including the need to take such steps as are practicable to ensure that pupils are offered a balanced presentation of opposing views in respect of parts of the film that raise political issues".

A review of Al Gore's film

Mr Dimmock, from Dover, is at the High Court to ask the courts to reconsider the decision to dismiss the case.

He said: "I wish my children to have the best education possible, free from bias and political spin, and Mr Gore's film falls far short of the standard required.

"Climate change is important, but it should be taught to children in a neutral and measured manner. Indoctrinating school children in this manner is unprecedented and unacceptable."

At the time when the scheme was announced, earlier this year, the schools minister Jim Knight said climate change was one of the most important challenges facing the earth.

Resources being sent to schools would help to give young people information and inspiration to understand and debate the issues around climate change, he said.

In the High Court on Thursday, Paul Downes, appearing for Mr Dimmock said: "Given the serious inaccuracies in the film and the misrepresentations it contains, the film is irredeemable".

He said he was seeking to persuade the court the film constituted "just over half scientific material, 30% pure politics and about 20% sentimental mush - mush there to soften up the viewer for persuasion".

Guidance notes accompanying the film pack went "nowhere near correcting these flaws - indeed they don't even set out to do that," he said.

The government's counsel, Martin Chamberlain, said guidance notes distributed to schools with the DVD, warning against political indoctrination, would ensure that the documentary was presented in a balanced way.

Although teachers could present the film in any way they wished, they were under a duty to provide balance - for instance, by explaining to pupils that some of the views expressed in the documentary were political and asking "What do you think about it?".