Most would agree that delivering national security is a core function of government. However with the advent of the Prevent duty, which forms part of the Counter Terrorism and Security Act 2015, the national security discourse has moved into the university lecture theatre, the college and school classroom, and even, absurd though it may seem, into the nursery class and early years centre.

Prevent is an anti-radicalisation strategy in which all employees of public sector bodies are to be trained. The UK Government believes all such employees have a specific role to play in preventing radicalisation over and above what might properly be expected of any responsible citizen.

There is an expectation teachers and lecturers will monitor their students and pupils for signs of radicalisation and report those whose views concern them to the authorities.

However the General Teaching Council for Scotland (GTCS) professional standards expect teachers to embrace equality; commit to the principles of democracy and social justice; value and respect diversity; engage learners in real world issues; and respect learners’ rights. It is arguable a legal duty which undermines trust, respect and open dialogue in the classroom sits in direct contradiction to the GTCS standards.

This is one, though by no means the only reason, why the EIS and the whole of the Scottish trade union movement has decided to campaign against the imposition of this pernicious legal duty.

Other reasons to oppose Prevent are manifold. These include the likelihood it will increase the incidence of racial or faith-based bullying or discrimination, particularly for staff or learners who are, or who are perceived to be, Muslim; its potential for undermining collegiality and sowing mistrust among colleagues; and the alarmingly broad definition of "extremism" which underpins it.

Prevent is a measure that could have the opposite effect of what it is meant to achieve and may actually foster greater insecurity. Anecdotal evidence suggests it will probably further alienate individuals and communities that already feel stigmatised. The very engagement and inclusion Prevent is ostensibly aimed at fostering will actually be made more difficult.

Muslim and ethnic minority members of the EIS are already telling us of the negative impact on them, and we are hearing about discriminatory practices which seem to stem directly from Prevent.

Moreover research tells us black and minority ethnic teachers and pupils often "self-silence" because of fears their comments could be open to misinterpretation.

Although emerging from UK level counter-terrorism legislation, much of the public sector implementation of Prevent in Scotland lies within the remit of the Scottish Government, so an important part of the campaign against Prevent will be aimed at informing the Scottish Government of the ways in which Prevent threatens to undermine our inclusive education system.

There are many examples of the Scottish Government taking a very different view on Westminster legislation that runs north of the border. For example, the last Scottish Government opposed and sought to ameliorate some of the worst excesses of the current Westminster Government in the area of social security. The new Scottish Government needs to develop some self confidence in challenging counterproductive measures in the area of national security also. The current attitude of the Scottish Government to Prevent, to some extent, threatens to undermine that deserved positive reputation.

At a recent conference on Prevent hosted jointly by Education Scotland and Glasgow City Council, the then Skills and Lifelong Learning Minister implied the Scottish Government had the issue of identification of radicalisation in our schools "sorted" when he referenced Curriculum for Excellence and the Getting it Right for Every Child approach. He signalled that at the operational level in schools these two initiatives provided all the tools teachers need to safeguard all children and young people against any kind of exploitation. Crucially though he did not explicitly draw the logical conclusion that Prevent was not necessary, and worse, he failed to say that Prevent is counterproductive and should have no place in Scotland's educational establishments.

If the philosophy of the Curriculum for Excellence is to mean anything, schools should be safe, permissive places where young people can have the intellectual space to explore ideas and make sense of the world. Teachers should be enabled to facilitate that dialogue with courage and compassion.

The motto of the EIS is "For the promotion of sound learning". If that safe, permissive space for learning and teaching is to be protected, the EIS has no choice but to challenge Prevent.

Bill Ramsay is the Equality Convener of Scotland’s largest teaching union, the Educational Institute of Scotland (EIS).