Note from the Chair

Dear Supporter,

Things may have seemed to have gone quiet on the public front in respect of the closure of our Middle School but much is going on behind the scenes. C.LA.R.E. continue to examine with partners the failures of the SOR Consultation and the inappropriate reaction to the parent/community proposal for a new secondary community college on the Middle School site. We have identified significant areas of failure and perhaps even neglect in the County Council’s process and procedures. We can challenge those issues but to be realistic we currently do not have the resources to mount the legal challenge which would be probably win. However we have written to a Government Official called the Schools Commissioner (see post below) who is supposed to represent parents’ and children’s interest in education, asking him to intervene on the basis of the bureaucratic mess and the inclusive nature of the advice arising from Government policy.

Our MP Tim Yeo continues to support and lobby for us and has recently been discussing our situation with Lord Hanningfield an eminent political leader in the area of education who has been very outspoken about the failures of education provision of late. Tim has also written to the Schools Commissioner supporting our contentions.

Meanwhile the LIBDEM/LAB/Independent opposition in the County Council have announced their intent to halt and change the SOR process and re-consult with communities if elected to power in the forthcoming local elections and you may wish to view their manifestos available on their respective websites.

It is our belief that Suffolk County Council has run out of money and cannot fund the changes they have proposed. Certainly in central government circles they feel things may have to change or at the very least remain as they are. We are continuing to explore the reality of this.

Also we are endeavouring to collectively mobilise support against the SOR Process across the county with other parental groups and parish councils who in reality actually repsresent their local communities’ best interests.

Finally C.LA.R.E. have not given up – nor should you. There is much going on, and we will keep you informed as and when there is something tangible to tell you.

Jim Meikle.
Chair.

Tuesday, 6th April 2009.

Sir Bruce Liddington,
The Schools Commissioner,
The Department for Schools, Families & Communities,
Sanctuary Buildings,
Great Smith Street,
London,
SW1P 3BT.

Dear Sir Liddington,

re: DCSF Case Reference 2009/0000640.

As the Chair of the under mentioned group I am writing with a view to seeking your help in respect of the above proposal for a new school. Our proposal has become embroiled in a mix of application criteria, inappropriate application of influence and confusion concerning the responsibility for decisions. We believe the only way the situation can be satisfactorily resolved is for an independent authority to review the application of the policy and guidance in this case and we wondered if this was within the remit of your office.

Briefly the local education provider, Suffolk County Council, have carried out a school organization review and in our area have decided to close Middle Schools and convert to a two tier education system. We have no argument of the validity of this educational argument but take issue with the fact that our sustainable and high achieving rural middle school [formerly our secondary school] is to close and not to be converted back to a secondary school.

When the closure notice for the Middle School was issued it is our understanding of the guidance that parents and the community can then submit an application to publish a proposal for a new school to the Minster of Education. The guidance indicates that the Minster will review the merits of the proposal and form a view, either authorizing or refusing consent for publication. Obviously we would expect the Minister to take account of the views of the local education provider, however D.C.S.F., are stipulating that the proposal must have local education provider support, which is not a requirement of the guidance or legislation.

Furthermore to support their opposition to our proposal, Suffolk County Council have applied both ’the closing of a maintained school’ and the ‘creation of a new school, outside of competition’ guidance to both the consultation outcomes of their decision to close the Middle School and to our proposal. This makes it impossible for any kind of accommodation to be reached. Furthermore Suffolk County Council’s refusal to acknowledge that their consultation and reasoning is flawed has stifled the progress of our proposal.

A copy of our proposal can be found at www.our-community-our-school.co.uk and for your information I have attached a schedule of the issues that we consider unfairly impact upon our proposal.

Unfortunately we do not have the resources or the skills to apply for a judicial review which we believe we could undoubtedly win. Therefore we would be very grateful if the Commissioner for School’s office could possibly help to extract our proposal from this impossible situation.

Yours sincerely,




Jim Meikle.
Chair.

£1.3bn wasted hiring school consultants reports the Sunday Express

According to the Sunday Express, the Government is throwing away more than £1.3billion on consultants for its flagship school rebuilding scheme.

The article reads:-

Thousands of “experts” are ­being paid to advise on colour schemes, organise building teams and say which companies should get ­construction contracts. But critics say the cash should be spent on ­improving schools.

Shadow Schools Minister Nick Gibb uncovered the wasted money in the same week that an independent report revealed that new or ­refurbished buildings alone will not raise pupil performance.

Ministers have been forced to ­admit that three per cent of the ­total £45billion funding for the Buildings Schools for the Future Programme (BSF) is ­being spent on consultant services. “

"Ed Balls’s department is woefully behind schedule with its school refurbishment programme,” said Mr Gibb.“Now we see that hundreds of millions of pounds is due to be spent on consultants rather than better classrooms and facilities.”

The figures angered teachers as hundreds of schools face years of waiting before the cash for their ­revamp becomes available under the rebuilding scheme.An independent evaluation of BSF last week noted that it had made progress in improving its ­efficiency but is still well behind the Government’s original targets.

Perhaps most alarmingly, the ­investigation by PricewaterhouseCoopers concluded that pupils would not improve academically because school buildings were ­either rebuilt or done up.

Significant other changes in how the school operated were found to be essential to any real improvement.One head teacher, whose school was totally rebuilt, told researchers: “I have inherited staff from the old school and some are brilliant but some not so much. A good 60 per cent of staff have not changed their teaching practices. "There is a long way to go to break the culture and cycles they are in. We’ve ­succeeded with ­students but it’s harder to engage the staff.”

When the plan to overhaul ­England’s decrepit schools was ­announced in 2003, ministers pledged to have 200 schools rebuilt or refurbished by the end of last year. So far, only 50 have been completed with teachers reporting a “significant drop in morale” when they wait for refurbishment.

One teacher, who asked not to be named, said: “If you are earmarked for a revamp local authorities stop spending money doing quite important repairs because they know it will all be done eventually under BSF. That’s all very well for pupils in the future, but it makes those currently attending the school feel that no one cares about them.”

Over the last two years, spending on consultants in Ed Balls’s Children, Schools and Families department has more than doubled. The amount spent on consultants rose from £30million in 2005/6 under the Department for Education and Skills to £72million in 2007/8. That money could have paid for more than 2,000 teachers.

In the last two years the Department has presided over a series of debacles, including the SATs fiasco and chaos surrounding this year’s Educational Maintenance Allowance (EMA) payments.

Shadow Children’s Secretary Michael Gove said: “It’s extraordinary that spending on consultants has more than doubled in two years even though Ed Balls’s department is smaller than its predecessor. “Despite spending millions of pounds of taxpayers’ money extra on outside help, on his watch the department has lurched from one fiasco to another, whether it’s losing thousands of exam papers or chronic delays to student maintenance payments.”

Further delays to BSF may occur because of the credit crunch. Construction industry leaders say that if the private funding often needed to top up individual projects dries up, many schools may have to wait even longer for much needed refurbishment.

Margaret Morrissey, founder of the education pressure group Parents Outloud, said: “Building Schools for the Future was a grand scheme, announced with typical Labour fanfare. It promised much, but as with most things, the reality has been a disappointment.”

http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/81742/-1-3bn-wasted-hiring-school-consultants

Clare school campaigners win MP's backing

TORY MP Tim Yeo has accused Suffolk County Council of turning its back on both Labour and Conservative principles by ruling out a community's bid to turn a middle school into an upper school as reported in the East Anglian Daily Times.

The county council is seeking to close all 40 middle schools and expand both primary and upper schools to take the extra pupils.One of those earmarked for closure is Clare Middle School. But those living in Clare have set up an organisation called Clare and Local Area for Rural Education (CLARE) aimed at saving the middle school site and forging a brand new upper school, which would be called the Stour Valley Community College.

However the county council has ruled out the idea as not “viable” claiming it would cost about £7million to set up - something denied by the CLARE group.

South Suffolk MP Tim Yeo has now written to the county council's portfolio holder for children and young people Patricia O'Brien claiming if the Tory council was “genuinely Conservative” it would not dismiss the campaigners' hopes out of hand.

"I am afraid it looks very much as though your decision has been driven by a slavish following of Labour dogma about “optimum” school size and increasing spending in urban areas,” Mr Yeo said. “It is clearly not based on what are the ingredients of a good and popular school or any understanding of how creating more choice will drive up standards in all schools. Conversely, there is no recognition of the detrimental impact the creation of new monopolistic super-schools is having on discipline and educational standards"

http://www.eadt.co.uk/content/eadt/news/story.aspx?brand=EADOnline&category=News&tBrand=EADOnline&tCategory=news&itemid=IPED21%20Jan%202009%2023%3A17%3A45%3A737