New Secondary schools for Richmond!

[BayJay]

Richmond Council recently published a White Paper outlining plans for Secondary education in the borough (cabnet.richmond.gov.uk/mgConvert2PDF.aspx?ID=23719). They want new 6th forms in every school, and would need to decrease current Yr7 intakes to accomodate that. To offset those decreases they are talking about creating two new secondary schools. One of those new schools would be a Roman Catholic school.

The Roman Catholic community in the borough are currently disadvantaged by the "link" system (www.st-marys.richmond.sch.uk/Newsletter%20Link%20letter%20for%202011%20links%20(2).pdf). Because the Catholic primaries are not linked to any secondaries in the borough, their children tend to go to a combination of out-of-borough Catholic secondaries (which are mostly rated as Outstanding), grammar schools and private schools, though some of the girls do go to Waldegrave, which is not part of the link system. Note that there is no reason, in principle, why the Catholic Secondaries couldn't be linked to local community schools, but because many of their children have other options, they simply don't meet the "25% rule" required to form a link. (See an example set of transfer figures at www.st-james.richmond.sch.uk/Admin/Uploads/Docs/StJamesSchool_Parents_NewsLetter_270910.pdf).

This raises several questions in my mind:

1. Does the problem necessarily need to be solved by providing a Catholic Secondary, or are there alternative solutions that would benefit the community as a whole (e.g. reforming the link system)?
2. Does the majority of the Catholic community specifically want to be educated separately from the rest of us, or is it the case that, like everyone else, they simply want an outstanding education for their children, and find that the Catholic route is often the best way of achieving that?
3. If Catholics had more options for transferring to outstanding community schools locally (as many already do, to Waldegrave), would they choose those options over travelling to a single-faith school in a neighbouring borough?
4. I accept that there will always be very religious people who want to segregate themselves, but would I be right in asserting that there are also large numbers of Catholics who would be happy to attend community schools, provided that gave them the same level of academic excellence that can be found in many Catholic options?
5. If a new Catholic secondary school is created, it is likely to have an entrance policy that requires a priest's reference (as per the majority of existing Catholic schools). How do people feel about that?
6. If a state-funded Catholic School is created in the borough, would non-Catholic parents also like the option of sending their children there, provided they weren't barred by the admission system?

I'd be interested to hear your opinions!

It has taken Cllr Samuel less than a year to forget " he is a servant and not the master of the public"

What the church will have to do is distinct from the council?s duty to act lawfully when deciding what to do with a valuable public asset, which the Clifden Road site will be as soon as its purchase is complete. They cannot just give a peppercorn lease to their chums on a whim.

Cllr Eady (Lib Dem education spokesperson) says ? . . At no stage has a decision to offer the site to the Catholic Church been taken to a Council committee or open to public consultation. We have therefore asked the Chief Executive of the Council to investigate this apparent serious breach of procedure.? (Oct 20).

The Council says no decision has yet been taken (though some Cllrs are implying that it is all settled - see Gigondas Wed 19-Oct-11 18:52:02). I think they will find it hard to avoid at least a pretence of consulting residents - if they do nothing this might be grounds for a judicial review, I think. No doubt RISC are getting advice on this point already.

So the DfE just requires a consultation to discover whether there is evidence of demand for this school - and this could be backed up by the numbers going out of the borough to other catholic schools.

But Richmond Council has not even consulted its own education committee or councillors, let alone its taxpayers, on whether this is a good use of public money, and the details so far are very unclear. And it's also rushing this through before any results can be known of the consultation on new converter academies or abolition of the link school policy, even though these changes would affect schools in the local area. The Secretary of State is meant to take these factors into account but there's no mention of it in any of the application documents. Taken in isolation, and seeing that Vince Cable is supportive of the catholic proposal, it doesn't look unreasonable - but it's the lack of joined up thinking and accountability which is so frustrating.

I emailed LBC re the missing bit of podcast and got the following reply "Apologies for this - it's to do with the fact that bit of audio was recorded, that it got missed off the podcast. I have published just that hour again with it included this time - In Julia (Hartley-Brewer)'s podcast channel. So you should be able to find it there now."

MuminLondon: Vince Cable?s position is set out in a letter dated August 26 to Michael Gove, published on the RISC website. He favours, as a compromise, a new faith based academy with 50 % faith based admission.

This past speech by Vince Cable indicates that he is generally in favour of inclusive admissions in faith schools.

Many people supporting the RISC campaign (including me) would not oppose a Catholic school with an inclusive admissions policy. Unfortunately a VA school would not provide that.

Just for info, here is a good document for reading up on the history and governance of Catholic schools.

If the Council has said that it has not offered the site to the Diocese, then can someone clarify why the Diocese has said the opposite in its application to Gove? The Diocese application states " The council approached the Diocese of Westminster with the offer of the school site" and that " It is proposed that most of the site is to be leased to the Diocese of Westminster at a peppercorn rate for a period of 125 years for the purpose of conducting a Catholic maintained secondary school"

Richst: When is an offer not an offer? I think what happened was that Lord True told the Diocese informally the Council was buying the site and would be minded to offer it to the Diocese if the the latter got the go-ahead from Gove for a voluntary aided school (but not otherwise).

This deliberately oblique proposal got turned into an ?offer? by the Diocesan functionary tasked with writing the request to Gove.

FYI Tory manifesto " Putting people 1st" www.richmondinclusiveschools.org.uk/files/view/other-useful-documents/Conservative_election_leaflet_May_2010_-_p1_and_2.pdf
Lets hope sanity prevails at the next Council meeting and they agree to do a proper Council led consultation on the options for schools on Clifden Road site

?A proper Council led consultation? will be proposed at next Tuesday?s debate, which is a special or extraordinary meeting of the Council called by the Liberal Democrats: agenda. This resolution will certainly be voted down by the Conservative majority who will argue that consultation is not needed.

We will also find out more from the questions from the public to be asked at the routine Council meeting the same evening.

Do we know whether the Tuesday's meeting will be webcast? I'm sure there will be a lot of interest.

BayJay: This is a very pertinent question. The key word is ?webcast?; the Webcast Home Page says: ? . . Following the successful webcast of full Council on 13 September 2011, the London Borough of Richmond Upon Thames will now be webcasting all Planning Committee meetings from 13 October, as part of its commitment to making its democratic processes as transparent and accountable as possible . . ?.

I will contact Cllrs Stephen Knight (Lib Dem leader) and Jerry Elloy (Lib Dem education spokesperson) to urge them to get the Council to webcast the Nov 01 meetings.

I do recommend the webcasts: the sound quality is very good so that one can hear what is said much better than one would by attending the meeting in the flesh.

BayJay: I think it?s clear the answer is NO; instead the meeting will be asked to approve ? . . a Protocol for Webcasting of Council and Other Meetings within Part 5 of the Council?s Constitution for 2011 -12?

There's more coverage on the Catholic school debate in this week's Richmond and Twickenham Times. There is an article on page 13, and more letters on page 26.

The article on p.13 reports that the chief executive said that there have been 'informal non-binding conversations' and ' . . a Catholic secondary school . . is a specific target in this year's corporate plan . . ' but that 'No decision has been taken to provide any particular school . . If the archdiocese makes a formal proposal a public consultation will be held . . '.

She didn't say who would be consulted; she didn't say what they would be consulted about.

Parents applying for Catholic School places outside of Richmond should highlight this gross injustice clearly in their application by 31 Oct. This will help our current campaign for a new Catholic Secondary school to be set up. Please read letters from all RC headteachers sent last week and write to Gove and yr MP immediately. Gove should decide on Diocese application this week.

Just posting a link to this interesting article about Michael Gove and the Archdiocese of Westminster.

Thinking about that article some more, and reading the original article that triggered it, Michael Gove's decision could be seen as a micro-test for the Coalition Government. It demonstrates that:
(a) He likes Academies (well we knew that already)
(b) He's not afraid to take on the Diocese of Westminster
(c) He associates non-inclusive admissions in Catholic schools with "excellence" and is comfortable with that.

However, it was the Lib Dem influence in the coalition that led to the rule that says that new Academies (i.e. brand new, rather than converting from existing schools) must have 50% open admissions. We don't know what Michael Gove thinks about that (correct me if I'm wrong).

So, will instinct (a) outweigh instinct (c), and lead to him to insist on a Catholic Academy (against the wishes of the Diocese)? Or will he allow the school to start up as a 100% Catholic VA school secure in the knowledge that it will probably convert to academy status within a couple of years anyway, allowing it to keep its existing admission system?

If Michael Gove does turn down the Diocese's Section 10 request, then my understanding is that they would have two options:

1. Set up an Academy (which they could still do without competition)
2. Pitch their VA proposals against open competition from other providers.

We're all watching with interest.

He's certainly against local authority control. It's ironic that the Conservative council sees the fact that there is no RC school in the borough as a central argument when the government is trying to take away LA control over admissions criteria, governance, planning of provision, etc. and the council itself is trying to outsource lots of services to Merton and Kingston councils.

interesting using the "gross injustice" argument - surely its equally applicable to both sides of this argument and numerically the non-catholic have volume on their gross injustice side.

The "excellence" argument is moot to me - excellence for a minority is not something that anyone with an interest in fair education should be aiming for.

1. yes - I'd like my child educated in the Borough in a secondary school that incorporates the Catholic ethos into the curriculum. The current situation is unequal as only Catholic primary's do not have secondary provision
2. No - I'd like my child educated in the Borough in a secondary school that incorporates the Catholic ethos into the curriculum.
3. No - I'd like my child educated in the Borough in a secondary school that incorporates the Catholic ethos into the curriculum.
4. No - I'd like my child educated in the Borough in a secondary school that incorporates the Catholic ethos into the curriculum.
5. Isn't a Catholic school supposed to be for Catholics? A Priests signature is required for every Catholic primary application
6. No - I'd like my child educated in the Borough in a secondary school that incorporates the Catholic ethos into the curriculum.

Sorry for the repetitiveness but I'm bound by the nature of the original questions!
The current lack of secondary provision in Richmond Borough is unfair and unequal as only Catholic Primary Schools have no secondary provision. Why should my child have to add to our carbon footprint by travelling to Fulham while I fund other Secondary Faith schools in the Borough? There are over 200 spare places in the Boroughs community Schools at present so where is the need for a 'free' school?
p.s. didn't our elected Council representatives have a Catholic secondary in their manifesto?

molpeterloy "The current lack of secondary provision in Richmond Borough is unfair and unequal as only Catholic Primary Schools have no secondary provision. Why should my child have to add to our carbon footprint by travelling to Fulham while I fund other Secondary Faith schools in the Borough"

This is perhaps the crux of the issue. It's where the council has utterly failed Borough residents by not doing any analysis or consultation before making the decision to offer the site to the Catholic church. Where exactly do the Catholics in the Borough currently go, and what exactly is the distance that they are journeying?

I'll give an example of someone living in East Sheen. They would be about 3.9 miles from The Oratory, 3 miles from Gunnersbury, 3.3 miles from Sacred Heart and 2.6 miles from Gumley House. The Clifden site is 2.8 miles away. Not really much in it, is there?

If you repeat this exercise across the borough, there are very few areas that are set to noticeably "win" on the distance calculator. Indeed even for children on the doorstep of the Clifden site there are Catholic options within a couple of miles.

You also mention the 200 spaces at existing community secondary schools. The problem is not with current free places, but places in a few short years' time due to the massive primary school expansion. In addition to this, most of the free places are in Richmond Park Academy, but the pressure on places is likely to be on the Middlesex side of the Borough. Is it really appropriate for children in Hampton to have to travel over five miles to school?

There is only one CofE secondary and only 70 places reserved for CofE church goers but more than 500 pupils in CE primaries (double the number of RC primary pupils). This is because it has an inclusive policy despite a Christian ethos. So there is no injustice reserved for Catholics.

There are 200 spare places in the less popular schools which are on the outskirts if the borough and 200 Catholics choosing to avoid those and other community schools - so far they have been lucky enough to find places elsewhere.

Being a manifesto commitment it would not be such a contentious issue had the council not backtracked on an additional community school.

For the diocese also to apply for an additional RC primary school is highly contentious and unfair, however, in view of the 11 primary school bulge classes in community and CE primaries.

The oversubscription argument applies to Catholic schools as well. A child living in East Sheen, for example, is not guaranteed a place at Sacred Heart in Hammersmith or Gumley. And as demand increases it will be very difficult for a Richmond child without siblings to get into many of the schools mentioned below. Several of the Catholic secondary schools will go on distance, once all the weekly church attendance criteria has been filled. How fair is it for families wanting a continuity of Catholic education? At present parents in Twickenham STILL have places at local schools. They just dont like the places on offer. Try to dress it up as you please, but if Twickenham academy had the reputation of Orleans then this site being offered for the creation of a Catholic secondary wouldnt be such an issue.