Mr Toby Baker

The Secretary of State does not make these decisions themselves. They are made by a senior official on the recommendation of an independent panel.

Teacher's name: Mr Toby Baker

Location teacher worked: London, South East England

Date of professional conduct panel: 8 November 2024

Outcome type: No order made

Notice is hereby given that, in accordance with The Teacher's’ Disciplinary (England) Regulations 2012, a professional conduct panel was convened to consider the case of Mr Toby Baker formerly employed in London, South East England.

Teacher misconduct

Ground Floor, South

Cheylesmore House

5 Quinton RoadCoventryCV1 2WT

Email TRA.Casework@education.gov.uk

Telephone 020 7593 5393

Information about regulating the teaching profession and the process for dealing with serious teacher misconduct.

Mr Toby Baker: Professional conduct panel meeting outcome Panel decision and reasons on behalf of the Secretary of State for Education November 2024 2 Contents Introduction 3 Allegations 4 Preliminary applications 4 Summary of evidence 4 Documents 4 Statement of agreed facts 5 Decision and reasons 5 Findings of fact 5 Panel’s recommendation to the Secretary of State 8 Decision and reasons on behalf of the Secretary of State 12 3 Professional conduct panel decision and recommendations, and decision on behalf of the Secretary of State Teacher: Mr Toby Baker TRA reference: 0017494 Date of determination: 8 November 2024 Former employer: Newham Music Trust, London Introduction A professional conduct panel (“the panel”) of the Teaching Regulation Agency (“the TRA”) convened virtually via Microsoft Teams on 8 November 2024 to consider the case of Mr Toby Baker. The panel members were Mr Neil Hillman (teacher panellist – in the chair), Ms Janette McCormick (lay panellist) and Ms Aruna Sharma (teacher panellist). The legal adviser to the panel was Mr Delme Griffiths of Blake Morgan LLP solicitors. In advance of the meeting, after taking into consideration the public interest and the interests of justice, the TRA agreed to a request from Mr Baker that the allegations be considered without a hearing. Mr Baker provided a signed statement of agreed facts and admitted unacceptable professional conduct and conduct that may bring the profession into disrepute. The panel considered the case at a meeting without the attendance of a presenting officer, Mr Baker or any representative. The meeting took place in private. 4 Allegations The panel considered the allegations set out in the notice of meeting dated 17 September 2024. It was alleged that Mr Baker was guilty of unacceptable professional conduct and/or conduct that may bring the profession into disrepute, in that whilst a teacher engaged by Newham Music Trust: 1. On or about 19 June 2018 he attended East London Science School (“the School”) for the purpose of conducting lesson/s whilst under the influence of alcohol 2. On or about 19 June 2018 he attempted to kiss the hand of Person A, a teacher at the School, without her consent. Mr Baker admitted the facts of the allegations and that his conduct amounted to unacceptable professional conduct and conduct that may bring the profession into disrepute. Preliminary applications There were no preliminary applications. Summary of evidence Documents In advance of the meeting, the panel received a bundle of documents which included: Section 1: Chronology, anonymised pupil list and list of key people – pages 5 to 8 Section 2: Notice of referral, response and notice of meeting – pages 9 to 28 Section 3: Statement of agreed facts and presenting officer representations – pages 29 to 32 Section 4: Teaching Regulation Agency witness statements – pages 33 to 47 Section 4: Teaching Regulation Agency documents – pages 48 to 155 Section 5: Teacher documents – pages 156 to 158 The panel members confirmed that they had read all of the documents within the bundle, in advance of the meeting. 5 Statement of agreed facts The panel considered a statement of agreed facts which was signed by Mr Baker on 11 July 2024. Decision and reasons The panel carefully considered the case and reached a decision. It accepted the legal advice provided. In advance of the meeting, the TRA agreed to a request from Mr Baker for the allegations to be considered without a hearing. The panel had the ability to direct that the case be considered at a hearing if required in the interests of justice or in the public interest. The panel did not determine that such a direction was necessary or appropriate in this case. Mr Baker was previously engaged by Newham Music Trust (“the Trust”) as a self- employed peripatetic music teacher. He commenced that role in January 2013. In that role, he provided weekly music lessons at East London Science School (“the School”). On 19 June 2018, it was alleged that Mr Baker had attended the School under the influence of alcohol. As a result, Mr Baker was suspended by the Trust. On 20 June 2018, a LADO referral was made and an initial investigatory meeting took place. On 27 June 2018, a DBS referral was made and the Trust terminated its relationship with Mr Baker. On 28 June 2018, Mr Baker was referred to the TRA. Findings of fact The findings of fact are as follows. The panel found the following particulars of the allegations against you proved, for these reasons: 1. On or about 19 June 2018 you attended East London Science School for the purpose of conducting lesson/s whilst under the influence of alcohol Mr Baker admitted the facts of allegation 1. 6 Mr Baker accepts that, on the afternoon of 19 June 2018: • He attended the School under the influence of alcohol. • Whilst on the School’s premises he: o was slurring his words; o was unsteady on his feet; and o smelled of alcohol. • He had attended the School for the purpose of teaching lessons and was seen by a number of staff and pupils in the manner described above. • In particular, he had o entered a classroom for the purpose of teaching a lesson; and o begun to set up a piano lesson for the purpose of lessons with pupils present. • His decision-making and teaching ability was impaired due to intoxication. • He was removed from a classroom by being led to the door by a teacher, [REDACTED]. • He was ultimately asked to leave the School site by [REDACTED]. The panel accepted Mr Baker’s admissions, which were consistent with the other evidence before it, and therefore found the facts of allegation 1 proved. 2. On or about 19 June 2018 you attempted to kiss the hand of Person A, a teacher at the School, without her consent. Mr Baker admitted the facts of allegation 2. He accepts that, on 19 June 2018: • During the lunch break whilst at the School he approached Person A on a canal walkway, which is open to the public and used by pupils of the School. • He spoke with Person A for a few minutes. • As the conversation ended, he extended his hand as if to shake hands and then, when Person A extended theirs in response, he grabbed her hand and moved his mouth towards it, attempting to kiss her hand. 7 • Person A pulled her hand away before he kissed her hand. • His conduct was witnessed by at least one pupil from the School. The panel accepted Mr Baker’s admissions, which were consistent with the other evidence before it, and therefore found the facts of allegation 2 proved. Findings as to unacceptable professional conduct and/or conduct that may bring the profession into disrepute Having found the allegations proved, the panel went on to consider whether the facts of those allegations amounted to unacceptable professional conduct and/or conduct that may bring the profession into disrepute. In doing so, the panel had regard to the document Teacher Misconduct: The Prohibition of Teachers, which is referred to as “the Advice”. The panel was satisfied that the conduct of Mr Baker in relation to the facts found proved, involved breaches of the Teachers’ Standards. The panel considered that, by reference to Part 2, Mr Baker was in breach of the following standards: ▪ Teachers uphold public trust in the profession and maintain high standards of ethics and behaviour, within and outside school, by o treating pupils with dignity, building relationships rooted in mutual respect, and at all times observing proper boundaries appropriate to a teacher’s professional position; o having regard for the need to safeguard pupils’ well-being, in accordance with statutory provisions; o showing tolerance of and respect for the rights of others. ▪ Teachers must have proper and professional regard for the ethos, policies and practices of the school in which they teach ... ▪ Teachers must have an understanding of, and always act within, the statutory frameworks which set out their professional duties and responsibilities. The panel also considered whether Mr Baker’s conduct displayed behaviours associated with any of the offences listed on pages 12 and 13 of the Advice. The Advice indicates that where behaviours associated with such an offence exist, a panel is likely to conclude that an individual’s conduct would amount to unacceptable professional conduct. The panel found that none of these offences was relevant. 8 Over and above these matters, the panel took into account that Mr Baker was in a position of trust and responsibility in the role he was undertaking at the School. He was also a role model. It was clearly unacceptable to attend the School whilst presenting as he did, which raised safeguarding and health and safety concerns given that Mr Baker was scheduled to teach and be responsible for pupils, including on a one-to-one basis. He was, based on his admissions and the evidence before the panel, unfit to do so. Mr Baker was also visible to staff and pupils when he was within other parts of the School. As well as the potential impact on pupils, some of whom witnessed Mr Baker and were described as being upset by his behaviour, there was an impact on colleagues who were taken away from their duties, required to react to Mr Baker’s conduct and were described as being affected by it. Whilst under the influence of alcohol, he also behaved in an unwanted and inappropriate manner to a professional colleague, making physical contact with her, once again in the vicinity of one or more pupils. Accordingly, for all these reasons, the panel was satisfied that Mr Baker was guilty of unacceptable professional conduct. In relation to whether Mr Baker’s conduct may bring the profession into disrepute, the panel took into account the way the teaching profession is viewed by others and considered the