Teachers "Commit Suicide" over OFSTED Inspections

In the Mail on Sunday is a report on the NUT annual conference.
Whilst most of the report covers their usual diatribe against Michael Gove, one of the most extraordinary claims is that the school inspection regime is widely resented and is blamed for raising teachers’ stress levels and suicide rates.

I just wonder in what world these teachers are living. As an engineer, through my whole career, my work was always subject to inspection, certainly until the time when I became a project engineer and inspected other people's work. Of course it was stressful, whether one was having one's work inspected or even when carrying out an inspection. But it was accepted because we all knew that lives could be lost if mistakes were made.

Why should teachers be any different?

Would they prefer, for example, to fly in an aircraft which hadn't been minutely inspected at all stages of manufacture by outside experts and then further inspected on a routine basis when in use? Are they opposed to the routine inspection of Hospitals by outsiders? Would they prefer that their food was not inspected at various stages by government officials and did they complain when it was suggested that meat inspections should be increased? What about Cafes and Restaurants, should they be left uninspected? The list is endless!

So why shouldn't teaching be inspected? Why shouldn't our children's education be subjected to the same detailed inspection as most other occupations?  Whilst children might not get killed if their teaching isn't up to standard, there is no doubt that their whole lives can be affected by the standards of teaching at their schools.  Perhaps there should be a resident Ofsted inspector at all secondary schools, just as there was a resident government inspector when I worked at a company making electrical equipment for the Military.  Now that would really "put the cat among the pigeons"!

An afterthought. Are teachers who have either attempted suicide or are known to have suicidal tendencies fit people to be allowed to teach our children? I certainly wouldn't want my grandson to come into contact with any teacher who was known to have contemplated suicide.

Is there any point in Parliament?

According to the BBC, a Parliamentary Committee has decided that Ofsted has "got too big to function properly" and its responsibilities should be split up to separate its educational responsibilities from its child protection work. However Downing Street has announced that they have no plans to make any changes.

Now one of the areas where I believe MPs can contribute to this country is not by standing up in the House as part of a routine "Yah-boo" act, but by quietly contributing, largely behind the scenes, to parliamentary committees. Most members of these committees are usually MPs with particular knowledge of the subject covered by the committee. Their reports and conclusions are invariably well worth consideration, and invariably their findings are ignored by government.
This of course gives rise to the question, "Why should MPs bother? "  Why not just take an even longer break, there is no real purpose in them attending the House if their hard work is to be ignored..
Parliamentary committees should have more powers and the government of the day should be obliged to give full and proper consideration to their findings, and indeed, provide an explanation as to why they are not being adopted. We should have more parliamentary committees, one for each of the government departments, and they should have to vet and approve the departmental budgets.