Meeting on Secondary school in Brixton

[Gramsci]

Looks like the Governments 5 year plan for education will lead to all secondary schools going down the Academy route and becoming "independant".Starting with all secondary schools becoming "Specialist" schools.Failing schools or schools needed in area of high deprivation will be set up as CAs.

Seems Specialist schools are those that can raise £50 000 private sponsorship which will be matched by £600 0000 by central government.

IMO looks to me that the New Labour long term plan is to privatise schools and get rid of the last vestiges of Old Labours Comprehensive system.

According to the Independant their has been an argument in Cabinet.Prescott objected to £18million going to Dulwich College(a public school) to set up a City Academy.Prescott had to be calmed down-must be his old Labour instincts objecting to posh Public schools.The hardline Blairites want to go down the road of getting business/faith groups into secondary schools.I think Prescott is correct to fear this could lead to privatisation.

see last 2 paragraphs of this article:

http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/politics/story.jsp?story=537313

 

[Gramsci]

Also this article on Labours five year plan;

http://education.independent.co.uk/news/story.jsp?story=537279

 

[Gramsci]

Got an email from SSCIL saying that they are going to have another Demo at the Town Hall at 6.30pm on Monday 12th July-everyone interested invited.

The Council Executive is meeting on that day and will discuss how to spend its £27million "windfall".

If you cant make it then email or write to Cllr Truesdale:

c/o Lambeth Town Hall,Brixton Hill,London,SW2 1RW

or email ptruesdale@lambeth.gov.uk

especially mention:

"if Council owned sites cannot be found in suitable sites in Brixton,the Council should be willing to invest some of the £27million computation sum(windfall) it is about to receive in sites for new schools.This investment in children will bring long term benefits to the whole community and help the council achieve many of its objectives not just in education,but also in the environment,health,community safety,employment,enterprise and culture.

I strongly urge you when deciding how to spend the £27million to ring fence £10million of it for investment in school sites in Brixton."

 

[Chrysanthemum]

More lambeth lunacy

Fantastic letter from Mrs Magpie--especially as written vs as printed! Hope the pen comes with poison darts.
Poor old Glenbrook School. It is one of the few Lambeth primaries with a good site and look what it's brought them! Lambeth wants to take their primary school site and cram a secondary school on it too! Strangely enough, people don't think this is such a great deal. The primary would become part of the Academy, so all the teachers and staff would lose their jobs (they're employed by the LEA and Academies don't work that way). What a surprise that Glenbrook, with kids coming almost totally from the Clapham Park estate, is being pressured to be a guinea pig in this experiment of putting a primary school in with a secondary. And what a surprise that Lambeth is yet again trying to put the least possible amount of money into kids' education, by refusing to give anything without at the same time taking away. Not to mention the fact that Clapham is NOT Brixton. (Bottrall said that Clapham Park is the "back entrance" to Brixton!!)
What a pathetic group they are. And the national Lib Dems are all over talking about local education... Just not for Brixton.

 

[pooka]

Any news on what happened at the meeting on the 12th to determine what to do with the £27m?

Incidentally, I hear there's disgruntled muttering on Brixton Hill about the possibility of losing their allotments, should the Thames site go ahead.

Nothing's easy.

 

[lang rabbie]

Any news on what happened at the meeting on the 12th to determine what to do with the £27m?

I phoned up Lambeth's Democratic Services (committee clerks for old-fashioned folk like me) when the paper on the £27million didn't appear on the website. Apparently it was never on the agenda for the 12th - don't know who was telling folks it would!

They confirmed that both the overall capital programme and the current year "Lambeth Opportunties Fund" are currently expected to be on the agenda of the Executive meeting on Monday 26th. Democratic Services aim to get the papers onto the website this Friday afternoon if all received in time for the first despatch to councillors.

Incidentally, I hear there's disgruntled muttering on Brixton Hill about the possibility of losing their allotments, should the Thames site go ahead.

Nothing's easy.

I suspected a darn sight more than disgruntled muttering...

 

[Ol Nick]

I suspected a darn sight more than disgruntled muttering...

What's more important, doing the best for the kids or growing your own carrots and mushrooms?

 

[Mrs Magpie]

I'm not happy about the loss of any allotments anywhere, particularly as so many have gone to be replaced by supermarkets and so on, along with Playing Fields which are disappearing fast too, but there is a desperate need for at least two more Secondary Schools in the area.
btw I notice that in that freebie paper about Lambeth sponsored by The Voice, Truesdale is repeating that dreadfully cynical crock of shite about the lack of school places being part of a 'Lambeth Success Story'

 

[lang rabbie]

There were a surprising number of comments on the lines of "would you want your kids to go to school in the shadow of a prison?" circulating around the Friends of Windmill Park stall at the Country Show when I popped over to see them on Sunday...

Did SSCIL have a presence at the Windmill funday the previous weekend

 

[Gramsci]

So what are you saying Lang Rabbie?This and your other thread on the 27million(which does provide useful links)leave me wondering what your position is on school sites and the 27million.

SSCIL are IMO arguing for local and central Government to make proper provision for Secondary education.They may try and use rational arguments-like saying look at these other sites and use soem of the windfall.These suggestions can be disagreed with by the Council/Government.Its then up to them to put forward proposals for proper provision.If they can only provide second rate schools they should be open about it.What I see is committed parents like those in SSCIL getting stick for just trying their best.

Im sure the Council would love it if people went on about the allotments etc.Divide and Rule.Make SSCIL look like a "vested interest group".

 

[lang rabbie]

So what are you saying Lang Rabbie? This and your other thread on the 27million(which does provide useful links)leave me wondering what your position is on school sites and the 27million.

I'm not coming at this with any agenda - more confused as to whether SSCIL have been effective in building a high degree of consensus in the Brixton Hill community. As the articulate middle class element of allotment holders were not issuing press releases already, this made me think that SSCIL had got most local people on side, but comments at the weekend from some people at the fringes of the Windmill Gardens project made me wonder again.

I have been critical throughout of Lambeth Education's officers failure to recognise the seriousness of the secondary school places issue, and to investigate all the options.

I've also been lobbying members of the administration behind the scenes to tell them what I think of the petty minded/Royston Vayseyish agenda of that minority of Streatham/Norwood councillors who regard a "New School for the South of the Borough" at Elmcourt Road as the only thing that should matter to the administration. I've made it quite clear to them that I know plenty of families in Streatham Hill who would prefer a new school at Brixton Hill as much as one at West Norwood.

On the other hand, I'm underwhelmed by calls of "Brixton Schools for Brixton Children", which fails to recognise that there have always been children travelling around South London to school, even when both Tulse Hill and Dick Sheppard were in full operation.

For what it is worth, I think that Lambeth should stump up a couple of million - if that is all that is necessary to make each Brixton school happen.
However, I suspect the costs of site assembly may be much larger than is being assumed, and given Thames Water's aversion to risk, I seriously wonder whether they will give up sufficient of the site to make a workable school scheme.

 

[Gramsci]

Fair enough.The City Academy programme is likely to go over budget.So unless the government stump up more cash they wont reach their target figure for CAs.It does annoy me that the preaent administration are trying to make it seem that the Elmcourt Rd school counts towards one for Brixton.Also that Ive heard them make remarks to try and divide the parents-when parents argue for a new Secondary school for Brixton they initimate that these parents are being selfish.

Saw an article in last weeks SLP about the parents campaigning for a new school at Elmcourt Rd.They want a non denominational coed community school.Looks like they will have a CA foisted on them as thats the only money available.So much for choice and diversity.

As the government is making such a big issue of education I dont see why parents shoulnt want a school within walking distance.

 

[charcol]

It does annoy me that the preaent administration are trying to make it seem that the Elmcourt Rd school counts towards one for Brixton.

I don't think the Council is claiming that Elmcourt Road is in Brixton. The infamous London Challenge document says that one secondary school will be built in the south (Elmcourt Road) and at least one City Academy in Brixton.

With four possible sites in Brixton I'm sure that two Academies will be built - how long it all takes is another matter entirely...

 

[Mrs Magpie]

Hang on, four possible sites in Brixton? I thought only three were being mooted; Somerleyton, Shakespeare and Thames Water.......

 

[pooka]

Hang on, four possible sites in Brixton? I thought only three were being mooted; Somerleyton, Shakespeare and Thames Water.......

Glen Brooke (sp) here

 

[Mrs Magpie]

Ah yes, thanks pooka, I knew about that one...I just don't think of it as being in Brixton.

 

[Gramsci]

I don't think the Council is claiming that Elmcourt Road is in Brixton. The infamous London Challenge document says that one secondary school will be built in the south (Elmcourt Road) and at least one City Academy in Brixton.

With four possible sites in Brixton I'm sure that two Academies will be built - how long it all takes is another matter entirely...

When the topic of a secondary school for Brixton comes up they keep mentioning the Elmcourt Road proposal.i think they hope people will regard this as the second South Lambeth school.

 

[pooka]

At the risk of being thought hard hearted, I'm not sure I get this notion that kids should have a secondary school which is within walking distance. I certainly recall taking two buses 5 miles across a city to get to secondary school and, on games days, coaches 8 miles to the playing fields in the outskirts. And, of course, 'It didn't do us any harm'........... (If anything, the wider catchment area led to a healthier social mix than an obsessively district school).

In Lambeth terms, it seems to me that:

(1) Lambeth should provide just about the number of secondary (including sixth form) places as it has children.

(2) It's likely that even so, some kids will travel out of the borough to school and kids from other boroughs travel in (assuming schools of equivalent quality); Lambeth is a long thin borough.

(3) Schools should be located to ensure that kids don't have to travel unduly (say > 30 mins) to get to school. That may or may not mean that every 'Town' within the borough has one or more schools.

 

[Mrs Magpie]

(1) Lambeth should provide just about the number of secondary (including sixth form) places as it has children.

I agree totally. That is not the case at the moment by a long way. It is also skewed as there are a number of single sex and or church schools providing a lot of the education in the area.....and most schools I have seen don't have a sixth form....

(2) It's likely that even so, some kids will travel out of the borough to school and kids from other boroughs travel in (assuming schools of equivalent quality); Lambeth is a long thin borough.

Yup I have no problem with that, it's just that hundreds have to leave the borough, there's nowhere else for them to go.

(3) Schools should be located to ensure that kids don't have to travel unduly (say > 30 mins) to get to school. That may or may not mean that every 'Town' within the borough has one or more schools.

I assume you mean by foot. Right now it's likely to be at least 30 minutes by tube to get to school......

 

[pooka]

I agree totally. That is not the case at the moment by a long way. It is also skewed as there are a number of single sex and or church schools providing a lot of the education in the area.....and most schools I have seen don't have a sixth form....

Yup I have no problem with that, it's just that hundreds have to leave the borough, there's nowhere else for them to go.

I assume you mean by foot. Right now it's likely to be at least 30 minutes by tube to get to school......

I'm familiar with the problem Mrs M., just queriing how proscriptive the solutions should be.

I guess I'm saying 30 mins, door to door by whatever means should be a limit to aim for, for secondary school kids in a city? Of course, there will always be cases where kids travel further because they/their parents choose to go to a particular school for educational or religous reasons.

 

[charcol]

When the topic of a secondary school for Brixton comes up they keep mentioning the Elmcourt Road proposal.i think they hope people will regard this as the second South Lambeth school.

Whenever I've heard the the Elmcourt school issue raised it's been to highlight the £14m shortfall in Government funding and push for the rest of BSF.

Since the obligation is only for (at least) one City Academy in Brixton - and the promise of a school in the south - it would be pointless to pretend Elmcourt is in Brixton, if that's what you're saying.

It's a similar issue with Glenbrook. If that option does go ahead it will probably have to do so with Somerleyton or Shakespeare Road because hardly anyone would regard it as a Brixton site even though it would need the allotment land (also included the Thames Water option).

 

[pooka]

Looks like the Glenbrook option has local opposition......

Parents oppose bid for academy

 

[lang rabbie]

Looks like the Glenbrook option has local opposition......

Parents oppose bid for academy

I heard from sources close to Clapham Park New Deal (currently working on their 57th variant of their "Masterplan" to get it through the hoops of approvals from Office of the Deputy Prime Minister and Housing Corporation) that if anything happens, the new secondary was unlikely to be on the current Glenbrook site. One location mooted for a new school campus was the current location of Clapham Park Housing Office on Kings Avenue.

This was all subject to getting buy-in from the current primary school, whose site would have to be redeveloped as housing to make the numbers stack up.

Its probably all changed again three times

 

[Gramsci]

Looks like the Glenbrook option has local opposition......

Parents oppose bid for academy

Yes Ive heard this one recently.Whats "innovative" about it is that it envisages to put a primary and secondary school on the same site-in the same area.Parents as your link shows are already against it.

 

[Gramsci]

I'm familiar with the problem Mrs M., just queriing how proscriptive the solutions should be.

QUOTE]

But its not up to parents to be "reasonable" about lack of provision in education.Also as Mrs Magpie points out a lot of the secondary school in LBL are Faith schools.The Government is the one that is making an issue of "Choice" and "Diversity".As thats the case parents should have a choice of secondary school within walking distance.

Either that or the Government could stop talking bollox about "Choice" and "Diversity".

 

[Gramsci]

Whenever I've heard the the Elmcourt school issue raised it's been to highlight the £14m shortfall in Government funding and push for the rest of BSF.

Since the obligation is only for (at least) one City Academy in Brixton - and the promise of a school in the south - it would be pointless to pretend Elmcourt is in Brixton, if that's what you're saying.

QUOTE]

The Elmcourt site may have to be an Academy if the BSF funding is not forthcoming.Where does the "obligation" to only one CA come from?Campaigning parents say 2 secondary schools are needed.

As for the BSF scheme did anyone see Newsnight last night?In Tower Hamlets the PFI/PPP scheme to refurbish schools as ended up as a disaster-probably the tab to be picked up by the Council/Government.The whole idea of PFI/PPP is that the private businesses are supposed to take the financial risk-they dont in practise.The BSF is a PPP type scheme.

 

[charcol]

The Elmcourt site may have to be an Academy if the BSF funding is not forthcoming.Where does the "obligation" to only one CA come from?Campaigning parents say 2 secondary schools are needed.

As for the BSF scheme did anyone see Newsnight last night?In Tower Hamlets the PFI/PPP scheme to refurbish schools as ended up as a disaster-probably the tab to be picked up by the Council/Government.The whole idea of PFI/PPP is that the private businesses are supposed to take the financial risk-they dont in practise.The BSF is a PPP type scheme.

You are of course right to say that the Elmcourt site may well have to be an Academy if the BSF money isn't forthcoming - at the Executive on Monday it was mentioned that the Gov't want to delay the announcement of the second wave funding until nearer the end of the year.

For "obligation" read "public statement of intent". The quote regarding "at least one CA in Brixton" is from the London Challenge document - I may be wrong by my understanding is that it's the only "official" Government/Council publication on the matter to date. Campaigners do want two CAs - I would imagine that even the Government and Council would probably prefer two if it's possible.

The Tower Hamlets PFI/PPP scheme has been a disaster. BSF is apparently supposed the younger brother of PFI that has learned from the mistakes of the past - only time will tell on that one. The existing secondary schools in the borough do need a huge amount of money spent on them and for the forseeable future it's the only way they seem likely to get it.