AIBU to think this particular Free School is a bad idea?

[nlondondad]

This posting will be of interest to anyone in London worried that there may not be any primary place for their child because it involves the expenditure of public money to set up a Free School in an area where it is not needed, thereby diverting money which could be used to set up a school where it is needed.

It will be of particual interest to anyone with a child in an Islington School as the proposed Free School will result in a reduction of 3 million pounds in the capital budget for islington schools. Puzzled?

read on......

Whitehall Park School is a proposed Free School for the London Borough of Islington. It was announced in June 2013.The proposers are a for-profit company, Bellevue Ltd who run a number of fee paying schools, both in the UK and Switzerland. The main shareholders of Bellevue are a hedge fund based in Zurich. They have stated that their preferred site is the old Ashmount Primary School site. This site is vacant because Ashmount School has moved a short distance to a new building, on a new site. Bellevue have asked that the vacant site and building be obtained for them by the Minister; the Minister has power under the Academies act to appropriate it without paying any compensation to Islington Council.

Islington wanted to use the site for social housing, as the particular area is well supplied with school places with the capacity for more if required in existing schools. They could expect to get a bit over three million pounds from a Housing Association for the site – money required for repairs to Islington Schools.

So if the Free School goes ahead on this basis there will be no three million for Islington schools for repairs, no extra social housing to relieve overcrowding, and the loss of other housing related Government grants some of which would be spent on education.

It now seems that a consultation is being held about this by Bellevue except they have not told anyone about it. The only mention of it is on their website, but not on the home page but several clicks in, under a button labelled "consultation" which before pointed to a brief note about a previous consultation saying it was over...

This is the announcement: I am not clear when it was actually made.

"Consultation

Bellevue Place Education Trust (BPET) is entering into an additional period of consultation relating to the site of the proposed Whitehall Park School. The consultation period is open now and will run until 12 noon on Tuesday 21st January 2014.

Following discussions with the Department for Education and the Education Funding Agency, BPET is now able to name the preferred site of the school as the site of the former Ashmount Primary School at Ashmount Road, Islington N19 3BH.

The Trust welcomes any comments in respect of the plan to locate the proposed school on this site. To participate in the consultation, please email any comments to [email protected] Specifically, we would like your answer to the following questions:

Do you think the proposed Whitehall Park School should open on the site of the former Ashmount School at Ashmount Road, Islington N19 3BH
Please explain your reasons for your answer to question 1
Please give any further comments that you would like to be considered in our consultation
All comments must be received by 12 noon on 21st January 2014"

My own views on this are well known, I shall respond by opposing it. By posting it here I am giving you the opportunity to express your own opinion, for or against. An opportunity Bellevue seem to wish to limit....

The financial loss to Islington Schools occurs because the Government is able to, and proposes, to take the site and give it to Bellevue Ltd without payment. Were the government to pay a proper price for the site, then the argument would be different in a rather crucial respect!

I may or may not be mistaken about exactly who you are, but you have used mumsnet education to campain over this for some time, which is your right, but some of the claims have been pretty low, but people can research those themselves, and decide if they feel you spearhead something or not. If you really are just a one man band then I apologise for thinking you not.

I also apologise if you did choose the school sometime ago yourself. I also previously had children there and my experiance has been that those happy for the site to be permanantly removed are in Crouch end and pretty unaffected.

I personally don't disagree theres a big issue about the deficit now caused, but Islington might have liked to have thought about that before assuming they could do what they were doing with asset stripping from the people as a response to goverment squeeze on budgets. Start a campaign for Govenment compensation for the use of the site, lots who oppose the permanant loss of it, and over-development of the estates, will join you!

justgettingonwithit thanks for that. I'm in agreement with you.

Yes there IS asset stripping from the people, but it is Mr Gove who is proposing to do that, to take a site from Islington Council without Payment!

You accuse me of "making low claims" but not saying what they are, this is not an argument but character assassination, but anyway given that you seem to think I am someone I am not are you sure that these claims, whatever they were, were mine? However as I have always posted under nlondondad, you should be able to search for my posts on mumsnet and produce examples.

You write:

"my experience has been that those happy for the site to be permanantly removed are in Crouch end and pretty unaffected."

Well I dont live in Crouch End either. The decision to move the school was made only after a full public consultation was held. The problem is that the project took so long to realise that people naturally dont remember.

The consultation was held at the end of 2006.

Of the residents who replied, almost all resident in Hillrise Ward, in Islington, (very few responses from Haringey, whom I am sure did not see it as relevant to them), two thirds said they were in favour of the school being moved. At the time they were notified that the most likely use for the vacant site would be housing.

The cosultation was very widely publicised at the time, in the press and by leaflet drops. But it was seven years ago.

But whether or not Ashmount SHOULD have moved is not relevant to the question as to what should be done with the site, and yes I AM campaigning by posting here, for it not to be taken from Islington without payment, and given to a for profit company, to run a school which is not needed in this area.

nlondondad is an inexhaustible mine of misinformation.

This is a long-running dispute in which a petition of over 1,000 signatures of local residents was presented to Islington asking for the site to be kept as a school because of the shortage of local primary school places.

Just so you know, the old school site (that an overwhelming majority of local residents want kept as a school) is now not in the catchment area of any primary school at all, there is an estimated shortage of places locally equal, over the next 7 years, to the number of pupils in a 2-form entry primary school, as the new Whitehall Park School will be, and while Islington refuse to publish their information about that (unlike the 2 adjacent London boroughs Haringey and Camden) it has been obtained, analysed and published on the Ashmount Site Action group website (ASAG) .
As to the 'lost £3 million', that is Islington's estimate of what they would have got if they sold the site for housing. It may also be what the Department for Education would have agreed to give them in negotiations had they not been so obstinate about refusing to agree to the site remaining in educational use. That's council tax payers' money they are giving away!
The only reason why local residents support a free school is because that is the only way to keep a state school on the site, since Islington won't.
By the way, if you are responding to the consultation mentioned above, ASAG supports the whole site being used for the school, and not divided up so that it is inadequately provided with outside space, like the new Ashmount School where that is a real problem.

Oh, and like all free schools, Whitehall Park School will be run as a charity, not for profit

Sorry I wasn't seeking to character assisnate, just avoid direct arguments that derail, and force point scoring agument which you appear to enjoy and I don't.
But wasn't it you with claims of for white kids only etc about the free school brochure and uniform cost etc, that I found pretty pretty low? If it's not then apologies. Those same scare tactics were being used in r/l to try and convince multi racial families of the estate to not apply for places.

I don't wish to search your posting history and engage in argument with you, I know your views and know I'm not articulate enough to debate properly in writing with you, and end up making 'considerably lengthy 'posts and looking dumb, next to the erudite.

I just wish others to be aware that if they wish to look, you openly (and I'm not suggesting otherwise) campaign on this issue using IMO specific tactics that you obviously find to be relevant and I find to be devisive, but it wasn't my intention to character assasinate you. (though I do feel you rightly or wrongly charecter assasinate the free school)

I believe rightly or wrongly that you also post under another similer name in other places, such as newspaper boards? (but don't want to do a John Hemming here) If that isn't you then sorry, but there is a great similarity.

I can assure you that a large number of Harringey residents had very strong views but only found out late in the day, and a large number of parents from islington's estates also opposed it but time and time again got told that only a tiny percentage objected. They were pretty mystified about that. There has always been an opposition to exanding the estates, not just on that site. They need to be spread around not everyone dumped in one area, especially if they don't need schools and other facilities.

It started with Islington decideing to asset strip local people, and now Gove proposes to effectly asset strip the proposed profit. Neither is right.

You say if it SHOULD have moved isn't relevent, no if it should have MOVED isn't, it's about what that meant and what would happen afterwards to the site and how it would be used, and a lot of local misunderstanding at best about how things were worded.

So if we're going to use SHOULD the school have been MOVED to cover should the site be sold, who to, and for what purpose then it becomes very relevant, because it was the backlash protest direct to government about it being demolished and the site removed permanantly from educational use, and over developed against local wishes, that has (currently) ended in the proposed solution, and Islington (currently) looking to not make money it expected to get, but yourself and others continue to insist it's all a done deal and (IMO) act as if there hasn't been continued protest all the way through and as if this is just about Gove and a free school.

Eva thank you for posting. I hope more people who can post about this in a better and more readable way than me (I'm seriously ill adding to my problems articulating myself) will set the arguments out for all.

Justgettingonwithit and EvaWilkinson, what are your views about Islington residents losing the £3m, if the site is given to the profit-making company? It seems to me a good reason to respond to the consultation and oppose the school.

I think the residents should take the alleged mismanagement of affairs up with the council, and possibly government, and if the company is profit making then rent should be paid before any profit, not insist that a large number of people should be shafted and an irriplaceable and needed school site removed permanently to fix the books.

Irreplaceable

I don't think that's really the point though. Whether or not Islington should have agreed to re zone the site for housing, it's done now. (As you say, there are other avenues to complain about that.) And local residents can't alter the terms on which the profit making company get this site.

So it seems to boil down to the question of whether people should respond to the consultation and say Yes to the free school, with the consequence that 3m is lost to a private business, or whether to object to this on the grounds that the site is valuable, and council tax payers should still get the benefit.

Please explain if I have got something wrong, because it looks to me that there's only one sensible answer if you're a local: to object.

It isn't 'done now,' there's an major ongoing fight, and if the group currently seeking to open a school there, (or any other) is profit making, I don't believe the terms can't be altered. Things aren't currently written in stone, which is why it's important that people don't act as if it is on either side of the debate.

If the free school doesn't open there, the fight to prevent the site being removed from educational use will continue, with a continued appeal for government intervention, because an awful lot of people feel they're being conned out of their resource and will continue to try and stop Islington council doing anything with it that means it can't be a school in the future, as a result of current cuts, because there's nowhere else to put one, and contrary to some claims not only is it needed, but in a few years time the situation will be much worse. (add another 80 flats and and the number of additional children will make that even worse)

There is another overlapping group fighting to stop anything that expands the set of estates into anything bigger than they already are, and to spread social housing tennants more equally and not herd social housing into one area, and create us /them areas. This is also a big concern for many locals.

If you wish to oppose it then that's your choice and right, it isn't my desire to shut down disagreement, just the disinformation presented made me feel obliged to challenge it as best I could.

3 million isn't being lost to a private business. Three million is what they can get out of selling the site of for profit, it isn't being given to anyone.

If the site is worth 3m and Islington get nothing for it, how is that not it being given away and losing money? Genuinely don't understand.

Sounds to me like Islington are presenting residents with an impossible choice - a rock or a hard place. I agree with pp who said - "object"! I couldn't agree more.

Why can't they do a proper deal with another education company to get money for the site? I don't understand that. Is it free school policy to give sites away? If so, that Mr Gove not Islington council's fault.

When I lived there, Islington council were like this (offering shit choices), on a much lower scale... For example we got surveys from the council saying do you want us to:
A) increase council tax and keep service levels the same
B) keep council tax levels the same and reduce service levels
C) cut council tax and significantly cut services.

And similar ones about parking costs that made my blood boil.

This was several years before the financial crisis in the labour funded years of plenty. What residents really want is for the council to be more efficient but that was not an option!

Probably not totally relevant but thought I'd post anyway.

The whole point is many say it's not their right to sell it full stop, because it's short termism and very opposed.

It is a needed school site that they should be using as a school and if they don't want it at this moment in time, when the locals do, they should be renting it out, not selling it of for short term gain and long term problems.

As a result of their decision from the begining to overide a lot of things, they've found themselves potentially overidden back at this moment and it offered to anyone who will provide a local school.

Islington wont make a profit out of destroying a needed asset belonging to all, but neither will they have to spend on it in the near future or be responsible for upgrading it, which was the reason given for not continuing to use it, not a need to raise money.
The free school will have to put their assets into upgrading the site, that the council didn't feel worth spending on, not the council.

Most are desperately hoping for a change of government and some very different approaches and there still to be the resources there to use differently.

The choice of who should be providing a school can be argued, few particuarly wanted it to be like this, but a free school is better than no school, and more people needing more school places, and yes they should have done everything differently.

Crochet not at all irrelevant, many people feel they answered all sorts of tick box type questions without understanding the end game being played.

@crotchetcircle

The decision whether or not the old Ashmount site is used for a Free School is Mr Gove's. Islington council have no say at all. Mr Gove has powers under the Academy Act to do this, and to take it from Islington without payment, and transfer to the proposers of the Free School, Bellevue Ltd.

I can only suppose that the consultation is happening, because the DfE have asked for some evidence regarding public opinion, before the final decision is made.

The consultation is being run by the proposers of the school, Bellevue Ltd,
and again Islington have no involvement in this.

@JustGettingOnWithIt

"The free school will have to put their assets into upgrading the site, that the council didn't feel worth spending on, not the council."

No the "Free School" spend nothing. They get the site, and they get either a refurbishment or a demolish and rebuild, which ever the Government decides.

I would be concerned about any Free School opening at the moment, just because the whole area of Free Schools and academies is proving to be a bit of a disaster area. Have a look at antiacademies.org.uk/2014/01/growingproblemsacademyprogramme/

It seems to me that Gove and his department have rushed into the entire programme and are so desperate to have as many free schools and academies as possible that they are not looking at the applications properly and certainly aren't monitoring them after they start up. That means that millions, if not billions, of pounds of public money are simply being thrown away, and children's educations and futures are being thrown into jeopardy. When it means not only spending DfE money but taking it away from local authorities, as they apparently plan to do with Islington, I think the time has come to say No.

What particularly concerns me about this is the hole-and-corner manner of consultation. I suspect this leaves them wide open to challenge anyway because there is a very good case for saying this is not a valid consultation. Yet more money down the drain.

I don't have any particular knowledge about the Islington site but I agree with nennypops.

Everything about free schools and academies stinks. The alternative to free schools is not/or should not be no schools. I don't give a shiny shite whether they are charities or not. Eton is a charity.

I'm a bit confused.

Do people want to send their children to a primary school in a neighbouring borough?

I suppose existing pupils could all move across one school until you had enough spaces in an area that had a shortage, but I am not sure that that suggestion would get a very positive response…

Why did the existing school move out of that space if it was perfectly usable?

I'm confused too.

If the site is worth 3m and Islington get nothing for it, how is that not it being given away and losing money? Genuinely don't understand

Depends on the terms I'd have thought. I suppose that Islington gets a new school (whether it's the type people want or not) as opposed to the £3m from developers.

Don't know if Bellvue would get to keep the land if it stopped being a school? If it had to give it back then it seems more like a loan of the land than giving it away?

It seems that another issue is that the developers would build social housing.

Is it more valuable to adapt the space to another pressing need or maintain the site as an educational space?

If, at a time when money isn't generally flying around to fund random projects, the existing school thought it was a priority to move, is the site really that good as an educational space?