Mr John Cable

Introduction

Mr John Cable was a supply teacher who worked as a Cover Supervisor through the Leicester agency Aspire People Ltd, with placements including Beachamp College and St Paul’s Catholic School. In June 2024 a professional conduct panel of the Teaching Regulation Agency proved that, in lessons in November 2021, he pulled his fingers across his eyes when referring to Chinese people, and made remarks and used body language targeting a pupil’s racial and national identity. It did not prove that he stroked pupils’ arms, leant too close to a pupil, or made the alleged remarks about a pupil of African heritage. The proved conduct amounted to unacceptable professional conduct and conduct that may bring the profession into disrepute, and on 2 July 2024 Sarah Buxcey, deciding on behalf of the Secretary of State for Education, prohibited Mr Cable from teaching indefinitely.

Background Information

The decision records that Mr Cable was employed by Aspire People Ltd as a Cover Supervisor on 11 March 2021 and first attended the school, called Beauchamp School in the chronology, on 11 June 2021. A panel chaired by lay panellist Mr Paul Hawkins, with Mrs Jane Brothwood and Mrs Rachael Fidler, convened on 24 to 27 June 2024 by virtual hearing, in public and recorded. Mr Cable was present and not represented; he denied the allegations, gave live evidence and called a character witness. The panel also received the hearsay evidence of Pupil A, who did not attend. Because her absence meant her account would not be scrutinised like other witnesses’, it took extra care over its weight, saying the hearsay evidence was ‘considered with appropriate caution’.

The Controversy or Incident That Led to Their Cancellation

The first lesson, on 9 November 2021 at Beachamp College, produced mixed findings. The allegation that Mr Cable stroked pupils’ arms on multiple occasions was not proved: although Pupil A’s email shortly after the lesson said he had ‘stroked my arm multiple times on purpose’, Pupil B’s live evidence about the same incident described movement in a narrow classroom space the panel could not call inappropriate or describe as stroking. The allegation that he leant too close to Pupil C was discontinued after the presenting officer said the evidence did not substantiate it. The gesture allegation was proved: both pupils’ accounts were consistent, and Mr Cable suggested he ‘may have done something visual’ to show a difference between Chinese nationality and racial identity — ‘nothing to substantiate that this would be an appropriate gesture for a teacher to make’.

The remarks alleged at allegation 4 — pointing to a pupil of African heritage and saying a person from his personal life ‘looks like her’, and saying of that person that she ‘is black … When the lights are turned off, you cannot see her’, or words to that effect — were not proved. Pupil B’s live evidence repeatedly used the term ‘African American’, deviating from his written account, and his contemporaneous note made no mention of any remark about the dark; that lack of contemporaneous support undermined plausibility. Yet allegation 5 was proved in respect of the gesture: Pupil A had written ‘I found this to be offensive’ and recorded that the gesture was used to ‘mock’ Chinese people. Though it found no evidence of hostility towards Chinese people as a racial group, the panel held that directly referring to ethnic or racial characteristics in this manner was inherently discriminatory.

The second lesson, on 30 November 2021 at St Paul’s Catholic School, was an English lesson. Pupil D, a credible and consistent witness, described multiple remarks and questions about his apparent racial and national identity — who the President of China was, where the Bank of England was — remarks he called ‘random’ and unconnected to the subject. The panel proved 6(a). It proved 6(b), displaying frustration when the boy did not understand his Chinese, his contemporaneous account describing Mr Cable as ‘raging’. It proved 6(c): body language suggesting the boy was a foreigner or did not understand. Mr Cable’s explanations — seeking rapport, not having noticed the pupil’s origins — were found implausible. Allegation 7 followed: the proved facts were indicative of a discriminatory attitude towards Pupil D’s racial group.

Public Reaction and Consequences

The panel found breaches of the Teachers’ Standards, including treating pupils with dignity, observing proper boundaries, safeguarding pupils’ wellbeing and showing tolerance of and respect for the rights of others, and held the offence of intolerance on the grounds of race relevant. It weighed his previous good character, engagement with the hearing and unquestioned teaching experience against actions that were deliberate, showed ‘little evidence of insight or remorse’ and breached the standards. He said that regardless of the outcome he would seek to continue teaching outside the UK — for the panel, a demonstration of significant risk of repetition. It did not construe a ‘deep-seated attitude’, but ‘a lack of introspection in relation to his behaviour’, and recommended prohibition with immediate effect and a two-year review period.

Current Status

The decision maker, Sarah Buxcey, decided on 2 July 2024 that Mr John Cable is prohibited from teaching indefinitely and cannot teach in any school, sixth form college, relevant youth accommodation or children’s home in England. He may apply for the order to be set aside, ‘but not until 4 July 2026, 2 years from the date of this order at the earliest’ — the decision is dated 2 July 2024 while it computes the two years from 4 July 2024, and both figures appear exactly as published. That is not an automatic right: without a successful application he remains prohibited from teaching indefinitely. The order takes effect from the date it is served, with a right of appeal to the High Court within 28 days of notice.

Impact on Their Career/Life

The order ends a 32-year teaching career in England. The panel heard that Mr Cable had taught English as a foreign language in China, Thailand and Malaysia, and his character witness described a notebook of goodbye messages from pupils and staff on his departure from a school in Thailand; little doubt was cast on his abilities as an educator. Sarah Buxcey gave that contribution less weight, judging that a published decision ‘not backed up by remorse or insight’ does not satisfy the public interest in confidence in the profession, given findings of discriminatory and racially motivated behaviour and the risk repetition poses to pupils’ wellbeing. His stated intention to teach overseas falls outside the order’s reach, but any return to an English classroom would require a successful application after July 2026.

Sources

• Teaching Regulation Agency, “Teacher misconduct panel outcome: Mr John Cable” — source