[ssb] Spending on new school buildings to be curbed?
Paul Welsh
knows something already:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2010/may/18/coalition-education-policy-cuts
"School spending is no longer ring-fenced. ... To achieve the savings
it needs, the new government will also take the axe to education
quango budgets. Clearly in their sights are ... Partnership for
Schools, which runs Building Schools for the Future. Spending on new
school buildings will certainly be curbed. It appears that BSF
schemes that have not yet reached preferred bidder stage have already
been stopped pending a review."
Likewise here:
http://news.suite101.com/article.cfm/building-schools-for-the-future-bsf--the-way-ahead-a237723
"Clearly the local authorities that have received funding and entered
into legally bound contracts with design and building partners will be
allowed to continue. There will be a question mark, however, over
local authorities’ projects that have not entered into contracts. A
vivid example could include those local authorities that have been
told by the previous government in March and April that they could
proceed. They may have this offer of funding (£480m) withdrawn."
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Save St Bernard's" group.
To post to this group, send email to save-st-...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to save-st-bernar...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/save-st-bernards?hl=en.
Alan Creech
Today's Guardian also has as headline news that the ConDem's flagship bill in today's Queen's Speech will be giving 500 secondary schools and 1700 primary schools the freedom to become academies by the summer. Including oustanding/excellent schools. If true doesn't this have significnat implications for St Bernards?
|
|
Paul Welsh
only "good", so it won't be offered the opportunity to fast track.
I guess if the Diocese believes that the academy funding just isn't
going to be there then it could go down a "plan B" route and opt to
turn itself into an Academy. Of course, there would be no new
building. There would be some extra funding but I don't think it's a
massive amount.
St Joseph's could be sold off to the Council and become non-denominational.
This was always an option, ie, St Bernard's becoming comprehensive
(or, more accurately, a Secondary Modern in a grammar system like
Slough's) - obviously there's no such thing as a true Comprehensive in
a Grammar area.
Personally, I think this is what the Diocese may end up choosing to do.
There is one big fly in the ointment, however. Removing SAAs
(Selective Admissions Arrangements) was deliberately made a
complicated process by the last government and any such decision opens
up the possibility of parental ballot etc.
The BIG danger is that the Tories sweep away the legal framework that
protects the grammars in their rush to create more academies, despite
their assertion that they will protect the existing grammar schools
where there is parental support for them.
On 25 May 2010 12:45, Alan Creech <alan_...@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>
> Today's Guardian also has as headline news that the ConDem's flagship bill in today's Queen's Speech will be giving 500 secondary schools and 1700 primary schools the freedom to become academies by the summer. Including oustanding/excellent schools. If true doesn't this have significnat implications for St Bernards?
> Alan
Paul Dodgshun
"* There would be no expansion of selection but grammar schools and
other schools which select or partially select pupils will be able to
continue to do so."
So who ultimately decides whether or not selection continues in any
individual case? Will the current system continue?
Regards,
Paul Dodgshun
http://www.number10.gov.uk/queens-speech/2010/05/queens-speech-academies-bill-50658
Tuesday 25 May 2010
Queen’s Speech – Academies Bill
The purpose of the Bill is to:
* Enable more schools to become Academies and give them the
freedoms and flexibilities they need to continue to drive up
standards.
The main benefits of the Bill would be:
* Allow maintained schools to apply to become academies and power
for the Secretary of State to issue an academy order requiring the
local authority to cease to maintain the school.
* Remove the requirement to consult the local authority before
opening an academy, thus simplifying and accelerating the process.
* Require the consent of any existing (mainly church) foundations
before a school applies to become an academy.
* Deem academy trusts to be exempt charities.
* Provide for secondary, primary and special schools to become academies.
* Ensure there is no change of religious character in the
conversion process (such changes can be made through separate existing
provisions).
* Retain the existing legal requirement for funding agreements to
last at least seven years (the agreement can still provide for
intervention or termination, if the academy fails).
The main elements of the Bill are:
* To provide schools with the freedoms to deliver an excellent
education in the way they see fit, within a broad framework where they
are clearly accountable for the outcomes they deliver.
* To enable all maintained schools to apply to become an Academy
with schools judged ‘outstanding’ by Ofsted being pre-approved.
* Primary and special schools would be able to apply to become an
Academy in their own right for the first time and will benefit from
the increased freedoms and flexibilities that this will offer.
* To make the process of applying to become an Academy as simple
as possible without a requirement for Local Authorities to be
consulted.
* We expect standards across the education sector to rise through
the creation of more Academies. We would expect a significant number
to open in September and for the number to continue to grow each year.
* Academies would be funded at a comparable level to maintained schools.
* There would be no expansion of selection but grammar schools and
other schools which select or partially select pupils will be able to
continue to do so.
* The Bill would automatically make all new Academies charities.
Related documents:
None
Existing legislation in this area is:
* Section 482 of the Education Act 1996, as amended by Section 65
of the Education Act 2002, provides for the establishment of Academies
and specifies the core characteristics of Academies.
####
Paul Welsh
"There would be no expansion of selection but grammar schools and
other schools which select or partially select pupils will be able to
continue to do so."
Well, well, well! Well done Paul D for digging out this nugget.
I can see lots of grammar schools taking advantage of the opportunity
to break their links to the local education authorities and become
selective academies.
The Coalition can then announce that it has got rid of grammar
schools. That will appeal to the "fairness" agenda of the Lib Dems.
However, the Diocese's agenda, in partnership with their buddies at
Slough Council, is to drop selection at St Bernard's.
Let us hope that selective academies are not permitted to ditch
selection at the drop of a hat. Otherwise, the Diocese will make St
Bernard's a selective academy, then more or less immediately drop
selection.
Currently, academies need only have one parent governor so the Diocese
could continue to appoint the majority of the governing body.
As usual, the devil will be in the detail, so it's when this Bill is
going through parliament that we need to put pressure on our MPs to
ensure that selection at selective academies cannot be dropped easily.
Phil Sage
From: Paul Dodgshun <paul.d...@googlemail.com>
To: save-st-...@googlegroups.com
Sent: Tue, 25 May, 2010 20:28:36
Subject: Re: [ssb] Spending on new school buildings to be curbed?
> For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/save-st-bernards?hl=en.
>
>
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Save St Bernard's" group.
To post to this group, send email to save-st-...@googlegroups.com.
ymco...@aol.com
Paul Welsh
> Slough LEA would be
> perfectly within its rights to continue with the merger.
Sure, the merger could continue. Don't forget that the Diocese wants
a newly built school that's significantly bigger than St Bernard's.
That's the prize. A new build school would be much cheaper to
maintain. If the £50m or so funding is no longer there for a new
build school though, the Diocese will need to come up with a Plan B.
> If the governors are genuinely 17-1 against a merger it would seem opening
> St Bernard's on its own as an academy would be possible as there would be no
> need to consult with Slough LEA according to the wording. That seems very
> much like a last ditch option and would be complicated by the attitude of
> the Diocese.
Don't forget the Diocese runs the school. It is the decision maker.
It appoints most of the governors. The governors voted 17-1 that they
weren't happy with the Expression of Interest as it stood. That
doesn't necessarily mean that Diocese appointed governors would vote
to keep St Bernard's as a Grammar.
> Can anyone advise why it is in the Diocese interests to reduce the school
> area available in Slough for Catholic education to just St Bernard's and
> effectively to release back St Josephs for development as a non religious
> academy?
As I said previously, the new academy would be much larger than St
Bernard's. It would be large enough to accommodate all Catholic
children in Slough. The Council couldn't care less about Catholics
outside of Slough and, let's face it, most of those parents will opt
for one of the grammars rather than the new academy.
Selling the St Joseph's site will provide the Diocese with capital to
maintain the new academy for years to come and free it of the
obligation to maintain St Joseph's, which requires major expenditure.
That's very much in the interests of the Diocese.
Paul Dodgshun
academy on the St.B's site.
This academies bill addresses a different scenario: the alteration of
a grammar school to an academy with the selective admission
arrangements remaining intact.
If the diocese and governors deliver an independent academy before the
LEA can close the school, then the LEA plan is dead, or so it seems to
me at first glance. I assume that all these fast-track academies for
September do not get a rebuild! The terms of the Funding Agreement
could prevent the diocese from doing its own thing thereafter.
Regards,
Paul Dodgshun
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Save St Bernard's" group.
> To post to this group, send email to save-st-...@googlegroups.com.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to save-st-bernar...@googlegroups.com.
Phil Sage
From: Paul Welsh <paul.w...@googlemail.com>
To: save-st-...@googlegroups.com
Sent: Tue, 25 May, 2010 22:26:28
Subject: Re: [ssb] Spending on new school buildings to be curbed?
Paula Adams
What do you mean about the Diocese and governors delivering an independent academy ahead of the LEA closure, and therefore hailing the death of the LEA plan? Aren't the Diocese working with the LEA for closure or have I misunderstood something here?
|
|
|
|
|
Phil Sage
From: Paula Adams <p.ada...@btinternet.com>
To: save-st-...@googlegroups.com
Sent: Tue, 25 May, 2010 23:16:11
Paul Dodgshun
You raise a good question and the final answer will be in the Academies Act when and if it is enacted in a couple of months or so. The fact at the moment is that No10 have made the following statement about grammar schools in the context of the Academies Bill :-
http://www.number10.gov.uk/queens-speech/2010/05/queens-speech-academies-bill-50658
Tuesday 25 May 2010
Queen’s Speech – Academies Bill
other schools which select or partially select pupils will be able to
continue to do so.
Paul W was then concerned that the diocese might remove the selection at the academy, having changed the people on the governing body. This is a real issue because the current decision makers on the removal of selection are the governors and the parents designated by the ballot system.
Would the diocese want to change to a grammar academy? Maybe not, in which case we are back to the status quo and your statement :-
"The way I read this and the rest of the statements at http://www.number10.gov.uk/queens-speech/2010/05/queens-speech-academies-bill-50658 does not preclude the closure of selective schools meaning Slough LEA would be perfectly within its rights to continue with the merger."
May I ask you to read :-
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts1998/ukpga_19980031_en_9#pt3-ch2-pb2-l1g109
"104 Designation of grammar schools
104(4) Where a maintained school is a grammar school—
(a) sections 105 to 109 have effect for prescribing procedures for altering the school’s admission arrangements so that it no longer has selective admission arrangements; and
(b) its admission arrangements shall not be so altered except in accordance with those sections."
and see if you think that this law and your statement are compatible.
Regards,
Paul Dodgshun
Phil Sage
" current thinking on the two sample schools is:• Slough&Eton as a large remodelling scheme – Design & Build• St Joseph’s or the proposed RC Academy (if this goes ahead) as a mainly new build scheme.There is a potential drawback to having the proposed academy as the 'new build' sample scheme, in that it isassumed this could not be a PFI scheme, whereas it is assumed that a new build on the St Joseph’s site wouldbe PFI. However, if the DCSF approve the RC academy proposal, it would need to be the sample schemebecause:• the building work to expand St Bernard’s and create the new RC Academy would need to becompleted so that the children at St Joseph’s could transfer to this new Academy• the St Joseph’s site would then be completely vacated and work could start on the St Joseph’s site• this would then enable the new build on the St Joseph’s site to take place without the need for decantand consequent disruption (the additional costs of building on the very tight St Joseph’s' site whilst itis still in educational use would be significant)."
105Procedure for deciding whether grammar schools should retain selective admission arrangementsThe Secretary of State may by regulations make provision for ballots of parents to be held, at their request, for determining whether the grammar schools to which such ballots relate should retain selective admission arrangements.
Consultation6. —(1) For the purposes of section 66(4), the local education authority must, before publishinga notice, consult(e) parents, teachers, school staff in the area who may be affected by the proposals, includingparents of pupils at feeder primary schools and those living, or who have childrenattending a school, in the area of an adjoining local education authority
Paul Dodgshun
I appreciate the work that you have put into that email. I have a few comments and I do not think you are quite there yet. Keep working on 104 to 109 and I reckon that you will 'get it'. I have been looking at that law for six and a half years. It took me six months before I 'got it' and it needed a massive amount of work to achieve. The comments below should help you considerably.
1: Section 28 of The School Standards and Framework Act 1998 has now been repealed and replaced, for our purposes, by section 15 of the Education & Inspections Act 2006[http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2006/ukpga_20060040_en_3#pt2-pb2-l1g15 - 15 Proposals for discontinuance of schools maintained by local education authority ]. This provides the procedure for the closure of schools. What procedure does the LEA use to remove the selective admission arrangements, bearing in mind what 104(4)(b) says?
2: In the case of a proposal by the governing body to remove the selective admission arrangements under section 109, what impact do you think that 109(3)(b) has?
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts1998/ukpga_19980031_en_9#pt3-ch2-pb2-l1g109
109(3)(b) that, in any prescribed circumstances following the making of a request for a ballot to be held under section 105, any such proposals under section 28[now s15 E&IA2006][to close the school] shall be of no effect.
3: The LEA, diocese or governing body have no mechanism for starting a parental ballot; only eligible parents can do that.
Since this law was enacted in 1998, no grammar school has closed despite numerous attempts by a hostile government. There may well be a good reason for that. Please let me know when you have that 'eureka moment'; I will be interested in comparing your analysis to my own.
Regards,
Paul Dodgshun
Luisa Sykes
Thanks so much to Phil, Paul D and Paul W for their hard work in keeping us up to date regarding all the issues we are confronting!
The meeting of ‘people’ will be a very good idea! Also, have any of you as FaCT members approached the diocese for a face to face meeting to discuss all these issues? Just an idea!!!! I know the diocese has not been open in the past about their intentions but nevertheless it would be another opportunity for us to express our views! Perhaps we can persuade them to ditch Slough LEA and set up a selective Academy with direct government funding?
It became clear that a change in government has not eliminated or reduced the threat facing St Bernards (like some of us wished). The new revamped and expanded Academy project appears to have gained a very prominent position in the Conservative’s agenda. If we can grab the initiative, set up an Academy and at the same time preserve the selective status maybe that would work for us and for the diocese! However, I don’t know what we could do to insure the selective status would not be dropped at some stage in the process!!!
Running the risk of contradicting myself after all I have said above, I still believe we may have a chance to preserve the school as it is and that should be our number 1 priority and the fall back position would be the Selective Academy concept!
Warm regards
Luisa
Phil Sage
From: Luisa Sykes <lsy...@musestancil.co.uk>
To: save-st-...@googlegroups.com
Sent: Wed, 26 May, 2010 12:17:54
Subject: RE: [ssb] Spending on new school buildings to be curbed?
ymco...@aol.com
palmira joao
Sent: Wed, 26 May, 2010 12:17:54
susy shearer
Subject: Re: [ssb] Spending on new school buildings to be curbed?
Luisa Sykes
In the papers today news of the Department of Education ‘fast track’ process of schools becoming academies. The estimate is for the whole process to take three months. This is how it works, I’m quoting:
1- The school registers its interest on the Department of Education website (www.education.gov.uk)
2- The school goes through an internal process where it ensures its governing body wants to become an academy
3- The school signs a ‘funding agreement’ with the DoE where it agrees to comply with the rules of becoming an academy
4- The new academy opens.
In our case, like Paul D said we could take control of the school before the LEA decides to close it, the tricky part for us would be to maintain the selective status in the context of the academy set up! The conservatives are very ambiguous about grammar schools and the diocese appears to be determined to eradicate grammars schools too! On the other hand, Paul W said it may be difficult to close a grammar school because of all the existing legislative hurdles!
Perhaps, we are not in such a bad position after all (hope my words are not wishful thinking). We have some defences, legislative and others, (fighting spirit, etc) so we actually have some options at the moment!
Do we want to speak to the diocese about all of these issues? Do we want to approach the Department of Education with a proposal? But I suppose the governors of the school have to be consulted first!
Any views and ideas about all of this?
Luisa Sykes
A little bit more on Mr Gove academy plans. According to ‘the plan’ all schools can apply for academy status not only the ‘outstanding ones’. However, quoting Mr. Gove, ‘it’s extremely unlikely that any school that is inadequate (ofsted’s lowest rating) would be capable of taking on academy status at the moment in its own right, but might do so if partnered with a successful school’. A school can apply for academy status by presenting a ‘strategic plan’ to the education department explaining how they would benefit from being academies. Full disclosure of the rules and procedures for setting up an academy will be published today, so let’s see the details....
Warm regards
Luisa
Phil Sage
From: Luisa Sykes <lsy...@musestancil.com>
To: save-st-...@googlegroups.com
Sent: Thu, 27 May, 2010 12:14:31
Luisa Sykes
Sorry keep sending you messages whenever I remember something I missed to mention previously. But one of the requirements for setting up an academy might be the requirement not to select which obviously would not serve our purposes. So, that would send us back to ‘square one’!!
Phil Sage
Admissions
What are the admission requirements for schools converting to become academies?
Outstanding schools converting to become an academy will be able to retain the admission criteria they currently use. These arrangements and related processes should at all times comply with the School Admissions Code.
Luisa Sykes
Phil, many thanks for sending the information!
Luisa Sykes
Phil,
To me this reads like good news. St Bernards can apply for academy status some time later in the year! At the same time St Bernards can maintain the selection criteria based on academic achievement and faith (I’m assuming it applies to any grammar school not just the ones classified as outstanding????).
I trust our governor representatives will start exploring these possibilities????
Luisa
From: save-st-...@googlegroups.com
[mailto:save-st-...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Phil Sage
Sent: 27 May 2010 15:20
To: save-st-...@googlegroups.com
Subject: [ssb] Admissions requirements for academies
Admissions
'Phil
Regards
Angood, Clare
I sent an email to Adam Afriyie - local Conservative MP in Windsor. Attached is his response.
Rdgs
Clare
-----Original Message-----
From: save-st-...@googlegroups.com [mailto:save-st-...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Paul Welsh
Sent: 25 May 2010 09:52
To: save-st-...@googlegroups.com
Subject: [ssb] Spending on new school buildings to be curbed?
The Queen's Speech will be delivered today but the Guardian thinks it
knows something already:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2010/may/18/coalition-education-policy-cuts
"School spending is no longer ring-fenced. ... To achieve the savings
it needs, the new government will also take the axe to education
quango budgets. Clearly in their sights are ... Partnership for
Schools, which runs Building Schools for the Future. Spending on new
school buildings will certainly be curbed. It appears that BSF
schemes that have not yet reached preferred bidder stage have already
been stopped pending a review."
Likewise here:
http://news.suite101.com/article.cfm/building-schools-for-the-future-bsf--the-way-ahead-a237723
"Clearly the local authorities that have received funding and entered
into legally bound contracts with design and building partners will be
allowed to continue. There will be a question mark, however, over
local authorities' projects that have not entered into contracts. A
vivid example could include those local authorities that have been
told by the previous government in March and April that they could
proceed. They may have this offer of funding (£480m) withdrawn."
Paul Welsh
could be expected.
Would you or someone else in Adam Afriyie's constituency be able to
write to him pointing out the following:
1. Currently, if the governors of a grammar school wish to drop
selection then it can be challenged by parents and a parental ballot
called.
2. The government is proposing that grammar schools can become
selective academies; a new category of academy schools.
3. This new category of selective academies need to be protected from
selection being dropped by the governors in the same way as the
current grammar schools are.
Angood, Clare
Yes I'm happy to reply to him with those points.
Rdgs
Clare
-----Original Message-----
From: save-st-...@googlegroups.com [mailto:save-st-...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Paul Welsh
--