Open letter from C.L.A.R.E to county council cabinet members

As printed in the Haverhill Echo

We note with disappointment the SOR Process Report to Cabinet that continues to advocate Option One for acceptance despite the fact the option substantially fails to meet the PDP criteria.
It is also of great concern that the report refers to numbers, year groups and monetary values as evidenced by section 99 of the report. The report rarely mentions our children as individuals who have been promised their rightful position at the top of the pyramid and access to 'world class education '.The cabinet will already be aware that the report has received a uniformly negative response from the press which demonstrates the strength of feeling throughout West Suffolk.

C.L.A.R.E, would argue that sufficient variation exists between the SOR Process Report and our submission to Cabinet to suggest that the consultation analysis and conclusions can be contested.

Consequently we would suggest an opportunity exists for Cabinet Members to select an option that can produce a win-win scenario politically and in the public interest. Option Three would provide that opportunity.Option Three satisfy's the rural electorate aspirations, whilst Haverhill could attain their long standing ambitions for the town's schools and Sudbury will be spared the chaos about to be inflicted upon them.

Their already oversubscribed infrastructure cannot possibly cope with a sudden influx of around 240 Glemsford, Cavendish and Hartest children created by the closure of the middle school.

The criteria to be used will prejudice out of catchment applications to Sudbury secondary schools, diminishing parental choice.Instead of having to endure temporary infrastructure for the foreseeable future those children would enjoy the 'world class education' they were promised in permanent and improving infrastructure in Clare. Meanwhile those in Haverhill and Sudbury can adjust to a new regime without impossible demands being placed upon them.

Members would be able to satisfy central government criteria for smaller schools and teaching units and could adjust catchment areas to provide a viable annual intake for both the rural and town secondary schools with respectable class numbers.We would ask members to consider if it is judicious to dispose of a potential stand alone community secondary school asset at a time when the borough councils are proceeding with expansive housing development plans for more than 7000 new homes for the 21st century.

Is it prudent therefore to reduce the number of school places and educational assets at a time of such development?For the last two years central government have not released the majority of the allocated BSF spend, can Members be confident that assured BSF funding will be forthcoming? Will planning constraints curtail estate disposal receipts and what impact will that create on viability if BSF funding is not forthcoming? Equally can the County Council cope whilst undergoing a substantial internal reorganisation with the management demand of the SOR process. Additionally there is a further risk to the continuity of our children's education should the boundaries commission create a new unitary district authority which is likely to have a different policy.

Surely the unanimous endorsement of Option Three by our county, district and parish councillors, our Member of Parliament, our local education establishment and the electorate suggests that option three has the greatest educational merit. Option Three will provide the promised 'world class education' for our children in the heart of all our communities' as a lasting testament and benchmark of which the Cabinet will be proud and other areas would have a greater confidence in the SOR process.

Any poposal other than Option Three will be an educational disaster for our children and a political calamity for our communities. There will also be serious economic, environmental and transportation implications.

Members brave enough to vote for Option Three can be confident they have voted for the 'actual bigger picture' and the long term aspirations of the SOR review process. Only then will the future of our children's education be assured into the 21st century.

Yours sincerely,
Clare & Local Area for Rural Eduction.

http://www.haverhillecho.co.uk/letters/Open-letter-from-CLARE-to.3831547.jp