Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Meeting on Secondary school in Brixton

Gramsci

Well-Known Member
Ive just received an email from The Secondary School Campaign in Lambeth of a meeting about a new school in Lambeth,Here are quotes from email:

"Please come to the Brixton Area Committee meeting this Tuesday night,4th May at 7.30 at Brixton Rec.The key focus of the meeting is new secondary schools for Brixton..After 18 months of hard work by SSCIL and the Mandela School Foundation there is 64 million pounds on the table for two new schools in the centre of Lambeth...We still hear from important Councillors that education is a "specialist" issue,that "ordinary people" dont care,only a handful of people who happen to be parents of small children even ask about it!..Please come out,show your face,and ask all your friends..to come out and look fierce and ordinary at the same time.

True news:The Thames Water site is looking absolutely great..and affordable..More on that later,when our negotiations are more complete.Shakespeare Road is also a frontrunner now,thanks to us and other sensible folk."

Some of those to be at the meeting:Anthony Bottrall-Lead for Education(LibDem)
Phyllis Duniface-Director of Education
Donatus Anyanwu-Chair of BAC(Labour)
 
I'll be coming.

Isn't the same meeting debating a proposal to extend the central conservation area so they can't knock down the Queen to build 'private luxury apartments?'

Edited to answer my own question: yes! Report here.
 
Yes your correct.I also think interventions from the floor are limited at BAC meetings-but Ill have to check.Im just repeating what SSCIL have said.Id like to go and report back but dont know whether Ill make it.
 
Gramsci said:
Come on posters this thread is not about "style bars" :D :rolleyes:

Good news that DfES and Tim Brighouse seem to have finally recognised the need for extra school places. Are the two Brixton schools additional to Clapham Academy and Lambeth's proposed site in West Norwood ?

No-one has posted on this earlier thread of mine about the meeting either - obviously I didn't "sex up" the thread title sufficiently!
 
Mrs Magpie said:
Perhaps we should start a rumour that Jamie Oliver is going to cook school dinners?

Dont put ideas into their heads Mrs Magpie or they will have JO as a "sponsor" for a City Academy.Can u imagine it the Brixton JO secondary school :eek: .Id reckon hed love it.
 
The two schools are on top of the Clapham and West Norwood schools,The schools in Brixton will be City Academies.
 
I'm very interested in the new proposed secondary school, god knows Lambeth is desperate for it, but I cant go to meetings with a seven month old baby, plus two other larger but still needy kids.
Perhaps that why there arnt more parents at such meetings
 
Money

Does anyone know how much schools got sold for? I remember something about Dick Sheppard getting sold for 10 million and Effra for 6 and Haselrigge for 5... You'd think Lambeth could afford to run creches for public meetings!
 
Don't think I can make that meeting , but I'm really interested in how things are going. Looks like our kids will miss the start date by a year, which means finding somewhere for only a year then swapping! I'm considering a year out of formal ed. till the school is ready because the options till then are too grim. :(

Anyone in a similar position with the intake year?

Very cheekily wonders whether anyone going can give us the gen on the meeting and also does anyone know what specialism will the NMFS focus on? I think Clapham is IT/Sciencey?
 


Minutes of last week's meeting of Brixton Area Committee
have now arrived on the Lambeth website, which saves me from having to provide a long precis. Basically Somerleyton Road seems to have been abandoned as a site, and Lambeth are looking at options based on the Shakespeare Road depot and neighbouring sites:

BAC Minutes (4.5.04) said:
PRESENTATION ON EDUCATION
John O Keefe, Special Projects Consultant, updated the Committee on the City Academy proposals. He conveyed apologies for both the Executive Member for Education and the Executive Director for Education who had been committed to other meetings on the night.

He outlined the Council motion from 14 April:
“Council notes the urgent need to find sites for new government-funded City Academy secondary schools in Brixton, and that the proposed use of the Somerleyton Road site for one of these schools is currently the only option that has been thoroughly evaluated. Council agrees to carry out a similar evaluation of the Shakespeare Road depot site to examine how this site could be developed as a secondary school”.

The DFES feasibility study on the Somerleyton Road site, whilst acknowledging that it was not perfect, had nevertheless approved the location as a viable option. Officers had not produced a report for the meeting as it had been felt such a report would merely amount to a litany of meetings. One third to half of the Team's time devoted to this project.

Devon Allison, Secretary of the Nelson Mandela Foundation, addressed the Committee and stated that parents had been attracted to the meeting under false pretenses as the Executive Member for Education and the Executive Director for Education were not in attendance. She stated that the campaign was on the verge of obtaining the funding for two secondary schools. However the project was in danger of collapse due to the perceived intransigence of the Education Directorate. Devon added that the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister had accepted the Nelson Mandela proposals for two schools in Brixton. The Council needed to give back some of the funds which had been obtained by the sale of school sites in recent years. The funds needed for the Brixton City Academy school would be less than the proceeds received from the sale of the Dick Sheppard school site alone.
Funding and location of a site needed to be identified by 1 July or a year would be lost. It was hoped that the schools would be operational by September 2007. Devon acknowledged that the city academy project was not an easy process for the local authority but the administration and officers needed to be fully behind the project to ensure its success. The three local MPs had expressed support for the project.

Ray Perrotte of the Nelson Mandela Foundation reminded the Committee of the motion agreed at the last meeting which urged the Council to be proactive in all aspects of the issues and in particular to dedicate staffing resources and impose deadlines to resolve issues of ownership of the Shakespeare Road depot and Thames Water sites so that the setting up of the proposed schools can go ahead as quickly as possible

The Chair stated that the reference from the last meeting, containing the
City Academy motion, would be discussed at the Executive meeting on 10
May. Members expressed disappointment at the absence of the Executive
Member for Education or deputy, and the Executive Director for Education.
The Chair would write to both.

The Executive and ward councillors needed to be lobbied on these issues. Members acknowledged that officers could only act if directed by the
Executive/Administration. Councillor Cattermole addressed the Committee as opposition spokesman on education. He stated that he was surprised that the Executive Member for Education or deputy, and the Executive Director for Education had not attended. He stated that the Council needed to identify a site and act quickly. It was unfortunate that a report had not been produced. Officers needed to display more pro-activeness with this project.

The Chair stated that he had been told at a meeting in September of a
feasibility study on the Shakespeare Road site. Members asked that this
project be allocated some of the recent windfall funds that the Council had
secured, thought to about £27m. Members also expressed disappointment
that the administration had not decided to rezone the land at Shakespeare
Road depot site for educational use.

MOVED and RESOLVED that
"BAC notes that issues relating to the acquisition funding and sponsorship
potential of various possible sites for the proposed City Academies in
Brixton have become much clearer in recent weeks, and that the Shakespeare Road site now seems to be in the best position to proceed in
the immediate future. Issues of funding and sponsorship for this site will be
easier to resolve in the short term than those for the other potential sites.
BAC notes that the remaining issues of the Shakespeare Road site are
within the Council's power and responsibility to resolve, and urges all
concerned to move this process forward as quickly as possible that
construction of the Academy can begin.

That the LBL provide a precise timeline on the issues and decisions required to use all or part of the Shakespeare Road site and that the Executive acknowledge that the windfall of approximately £27m should in part be used to fill the financial gap for the Brixton City Academy "
 
Gramsci said:
Didnt you know i drink coffee in the Phoenix
Only tiny glasses of super-strong black espresso while puffing sardonically on a Gitane (sans-filtre, naturellement) and surreptitiously adjusting your beret in the mirror. ;)
 
Doing my shopping this morning saw a stall outside the Ritzy by SSCIL.Got a few leaflets and an email.Here is summary of relevant details.As u know the SSCIL have been campaigning hard for the Shakespeare RD and Thames Water site on Brixton Hill to be used as School sites.As the Council has sold School sites off money will have to be use to buy suitable sites.Two local sites that were sold were Dick Sheppard(£10million) and Effra(£5-6million) for example.Therefore SSCIL say that the Council should stump up the money for 2 new sites.They need 10million to do it.This will bring in £64million from central government to set up 2 new City Academies if the Council provide the sites.The 2 sponsors that SSCIL have found are not interested in the Somerleyton Rd site.

The final decision will be taken by the Council on 14th June at 7pm at the Town Hall.Quote from SSCIL;

"This is decision time.If they dont vote the money,we will probably lose the chance for excellant new schools.We know the £4million sponsorship money promised to us if we secure the sites will walk off to other London boroughs."

"Join local parents and children.Demonstrate outside Lambeth Town Hall.
Monday 14th June 6.30pm-bring banners and whistles-let the Council
Executive know you care."

If you cant make (or as well)write to Cllr Peter Truesdale-email at ptruesdale@lambeth.gov.uk or write c/o Lambeth Town Hall,Brixton Hill,SW9 1RW
 
How would SSCIL like to see a new school operate?An example is that of the Charter School in Dulwich.Here is SSCIL quote:

"Could local parents build the foundations for a successful local school in Lambeth?The charter school in Dulwich is now an oversubscribed community school which last year received as excellent Ofsted report.
The story began in 1997 when local parents started lobbying Southwark Council for a new 11-18 co-ed community for Dulwich.They wanted a school that would be open to all local children,whatever their ability..The Charter school is now oversubscribed and most children can walk to school..Cllr Stephanie Elsey says:"Its creation is a tribute to the efforts of local parents who have worked so hard to see their children achieve academic success in a school rooted firmly in the local community."...Jim Henderson,The assistant head teacher at the school describes the difference the school has made:"Before the Charter School opened,one local primary school sent its Year6 pupils to 40 different primary schools.Now two thirds of them come to us.We have really helped to hold hte community together." "

The SSCIL have set up the Nelson Mandela School Foundation(they got his permission to use his name).

www.mandelaschool.org.uk
 
I'm slightly concerned that someone in SSCIL seems to think that the proceeds from previous Brixton school sales are sloshing around in Lambeth's coffers - the money (together with some extra cash from central Government) got spent on the new and refurbished primary schools such as Jubilee and King's Avenue.

There's a separate, and very legitimate, question about how much Lambeth should stump up towards the two new schools given that it cannot offer sites (most previous rounds of academies have replaced so-called "failing schools" rather than being completely new provision.
 
lang rabbie said:
There's a separate, and very legitimate, question about how much Lambeth should stump up towards the two new schools given that it cannot offer sites (most previous rounds of academies have replaced so-called "failing schools" rather than being completely new provision.
Surely the most rational system is to have an Inner London Education Authority to organise and fund sufficient secondary provision.
 
Money money money

I think most of us know that money disappears in Lambeth really quickly, and that there isn't much to show for it. I don't want to remember how many meetings I've attended where someone (or lots of people) said "where's the Dick Sheppard money, and how much did you get for it, and where's the section 106 money coming back to Brixton youth????" there were never any good answers. But they got at least 10 million for that site alone, and they've just put two more schools up for sale last week (old Lilian Baylis site and something in Norwood that's been closed a while) so they can afford to buy something for Brixton. I should know better by now, but I'm still shocked that they want to give Brixton exactly NOTHING after years of selling everything here that wasn't nailed down. As far as I can tell the Council is saying "Brixton kids aren't worth 10 pounds let alone 10 million" and they expect that we'll all just take it, like we've been doing for the past decade or more.
And by the way, Lang Rabbie, there is no way that 2 new primary schools should've cost 10+ old schools to build. Lambeth sold AT LEAST 10 schools in the past 10 years.


lang rabbie said:
I'm slightly concerned that someone in SSCIL seems to think that the proceeds from previous Brixton school sales are sloshing around in Lambeth's coffers - the money (together with some extra cash from central Government) got spent on the new and refurbished primary schools such as Jubilee and King's Avenue.

There's a separate, and very legitimate, question about how much Lambeth should stump up towards the two new schools given that it cannot offer sites (most previous rounds of academies have replaced so-called "failing schools" rather than being completely new provision.
:mad:
 
Forgot

Forgot to say something about talk about this "completely new provision" thing that the Council is using to dodge now. Brixton doesn't have even one single secondary school, because they were all SOLD. The old school sites are now covered in FLATS. So this crazy thing that the Council is saying "We don't have any failing schools" as though this is a GOOD thing, is just...unspeakable. We export more kids than any other borough, we force them out, it's a MAJORITY that are forced out and we can't talk about new schools? We're supposed to do without schools forever?
When did a state school in your neighbourhood become a luxury?! When did we decide that it was OK for children to be sent begging all over London for a place to go to school when they left primary school??? :mad:
And is it just Brixton kids who are second, third, no-class citizens????
How about SOME provision, even if it does have to be "completely new"??
 
I am not saying that there shouldn't be new schools for Brixton. I was one of those arguing with Lambeth Council's officers at the time of school closures, saying that the figures they had for pupil numbers were rubbish.

All I am saying is that anyone who believes that there is some pot of money sitting in the Borough from the earlier sales of schools is wrong.

Lambeth's Primary Schools Development Strategy (PSDS) was massively mismanaged.

The 2000/01 budget of the PSDS for £9.7m for four new schools rose to at least £18m for three.
Source: press story from two years ago
 
Chrysanthemum said:
I think most of us know that money disappears in Lambeth really quickly, and that there isn't much to show for it. I don't want to remember how many meetings I've attended where someone (or lots of people) said "where's the Dick Sheppard money, and how much did you get for it, and where's the section 106 money coming back to Brixton youth????" there were never any good answers.

And by the way, Lang Rabbie, there is no way that 2 new primary schools should've cost 10+ old schools to build. Lambeth sold AT LEAST 10 schools in the past 10 years.

The S106 money from Dick Sheppard has funded the refurbishment of the old library in West Norwood, which was re-opened last weekend as a youth and community resource.

Lang Rabbie is, unfortunately, right to say that the money raised from the sale of the closed primary schools has all been swallowed up by the costs of building 3 new primary schools, the costs having been allowed to run 100% over budget.
 
Mr BC said:
Lang Rabbie is, unfortunately, right to say that the money raised from the sale of the closed primary schools has all been swallowed up by the costs of building 3 new primary schools, the costs having been allowed to run 100% over budget.
Was PFI involved, by any chance? :rolleyes:
 
lang rabbie said:
I am not saying that there shouldn't be new schools for Brixton. I was one of those arguing with Lambeth Council's officers at the time of school closures, saying that the figures they had for pupil numbers were rubbish.

All I am saying is that anyone who believes that there is some pot of money sitting in the Borough from the earlier sales of schools is wrong.

Lambeth's Primary Schools Development Strategy (PSDS) was massively mismanaged.


Source: press story from two years ago

But the Gaurdian report states that the Labour Council was under political pressure to produce a "flagship" scheme.This could only be Tonys cronies at Millbank.I remember at the time much talk from the New Labour Council of modernisation etc.The same attitude was seen in the proposed "Modernisation" of the Library service.What Chrysanthemum means IMO is that these schools and sites were sold and now the Council is wringing its hands saying its got no funds or sites.I know this was done under a Labour Council and the present one is Lib/Dem Tory.Unbelieveably the Labour Group once they had lost power opposed the sale of Effra to a developer.

As SSCIL is a parents pressure group they can point out the absurdities that go on.It seems to me the everyone was telling the Council it was short sighted to sell these sites.I remember a parent telling me when he was opposing a local school sale he was told he was being selfish.I was at a meeting recently where SSCIL were criticised as "There are other ways of doing things"-a mantra For those who suck up to the Council.It means you shouldnt disagree with the Council.Fortunately SSCIL are independant of the Council and its various "consultative" bodies.
 
Gramsci said:
But the Gaurdian report states that the Labour Council was under political pressure to produce a "flagship" scheme.This could only be Tonys cronies at Millbank.I remember at the time much talk from the New Labour Council of modernisation etc.The same attitude was seen in the proposed "Modernisation" of the Library service.What Chrysanthemum means IMO is that these schools and sites were sold and now the Council is wringing its hands saying its got no funds or sites.I know this was done under a Labour Council and the present one is Lib/Dem Tory.Unbelieveably the Labour Group once they had lost power opposed the sale of Effra to a developer.

As SSCIL is a parents pressure group they can point out the absurdities that go on.It seems to me the everyone was telling the Council it was short sighted to sell these sites.I remember a parent telling me when he was opposing a local school sale he was told he was being selfish.I was at a meeting recently where SSCIL were criticised as "There are other ways of doing things"-a mantra For those who suck up to the Council.It means you shouldnt disagree with the Council.Fortunately SSCIL are independant of the Council and its various "consultative" bodies.

Unfortunately, SSCIL are at the forefront of putting out the very misleading message that the council could 'reinvest' the money from the sale of Norwood Park School to buy the Thames Water site. Lang Rabbie is absolutely right to say that the money from that sale is needed to balance the books on the whole Primary School Development Strategy (you have to hand it to new Labour for dreaming up such a catchy Orwellian title for a plan to close schools). SSCIL are well aware of this fact and I am puzzled that they continue to tell parents otherwise.

I have also had a rush of parents at my surgery telling me that the council wanted to build a new Brixton secondary school in an area 'awash with drug dealers and criminals' i.e. Somerleyton Road. The argument then runs that the council should build any new school on the Thames Water site on Brixton Hill. Am I alone in thinking it extremely unhelpful that SSCIL seeks to denigrate East Brixton in this way as part of its campaign to get a school in what is, undeniably, a much more middle class part of Brixton?
 
Mr BC said:
Am I alone in thinking it extremely unhelpful that SSCIL seeks to denigrate East Brixton in this way as part of its campaign to get a school in what is, undeniably, a much more middle class part of Brixton?
It's certainly unhelpful to people who want to develop East Brixton, but parents are given more "choice" now and they are bound to exercise it. I think the other point is that SSCIL is founded mostly from Sudbourne School parents (natch) who understandably want a school near to where they live.
 
Back
Top Bottom