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!

I am very unhappy about educational segregation on any grounds - class, finance, race, religion, gender, etc.

p.s. Just for info, here is a Financial Times article about Free Schools with a religious ethos.

And, here is a more opinionated piece from the New Statesman (although I suggest we don't start a discussion about it - perhaps people could post their comments to the author directly if they have any)

From my local counsellor

'This Council resolves, bearing in mind its commitment to respect equal opportunities and the place of minorities in our community, to maintain its longstanding commitment to the provision of a Roman Catholic school, reaffirmed under successive administrations and, as agreed without opposition by this full Council in its Corporate Plan adopted in April 2011; and to ensure, in accordance with its normal practice, Borough-wide public consultation on any proposal that may come forward for such a school including on the use of the Clifden site.'

It looks like the Webcast of last night's council meeting is available now, though I haven't tested to see if it works.

Here is the agenda for the special meeting and vote at the start.

Here is the agenda for the main part of the meeting, which includes several public questions about the Clifden Rd issue.

The debate last night was terrifyingly bad. How can any decision be made about whether this site, bought for £10 million of council taxpayers' money, should be handed over to the Catholic church for 125 years at a peppercorn rent until we have accurate figures for the numbers of children who will need school places in 5 years time and where else a community secondary school or other provision for them could be located if not at Clifden? Hampton and Twickenham Academy are almost full and there are bulge classes at practically every primary school in Teddington and Twickenham and permanent expansions going through at many of them. Where are they all going to go? It does seem that there is a lopsidedness about the availability of places at RPA and the large number of children, especially boys, from several miles away who will have nowhere to go. People in that part of the Borough need to get behind RPA and make it more successful - not sure that will occur if a lot of children are forced to go there from the Twickenham area because they aren't allowed to go to a school on the Clifden site.

Lottie - I didn;t have the heart to listen - I listened to the early part of the council meeting when the RISC petition was heard - and was truly appalled by the standard of the arguments for an unrelated topic. Truly made me realise why so much local governemnt was in such a sorry state. The pomposity in many cases was difficult to swallow.

How depressing.

I've just watched most of it. I hate the point scoring between political parties - they must realise how childish that looks to the public. Stephen Knight spoke very clearly and on the other side Councillor Samuel made some interesting points supporting tbe RC point of view. Lord True was really pompous. Still, I like the fact that they have started doing webcasts.

I agree that the standard of debate is poor, and that there is too much childish point scoring. There are reasonable, intelligent people on both sides of the council, and if only they worked together a bit more, and showed a willingness to listen to the arguments rather than simply following the party line, we'd all be in a better place.

One advantage of the webcast system is that we can all see how our councillors are performing. It will certainly influence my vote. Perhaps it will encourage good new candidates (on both sides) to come forward for election next time. My concern is that good, reasonable, thinking people are alienated by the current party system.

I hope that the consultation that is being promised will include an option for an inclusive Catholic Academy.

"One advantage of the webcast system is that we can all see how our councillors are performing. It will certainly influence my vote."

Hear, hear.

One advantage of the current debate over secondary schools is that it has opened my eyes to the state of local government and our elected representatives. The reasonable people with intelligent points to make stand out regardless of which side they are arguing for.

Its undoubtedly changed my political thinking.

I completely agree - this is not and should not be a political split over a religious school. I'm happy to be persuaded that the council is acting in good faith (excuse the pun) as long as I can be reassured that there is a practical case for a VA school over a faith academy and that other priorities on school places and sixth forms will be addressed. But a debate that becomes circular or confrontational, childish accusations about the LibDems sitting in the fence or what previous Tory councils or governments did, is not going to achieve that for me.

Really dissapointed by counduct of our councillors - even the leader spoke with so much arrogance and set a bad example ! But overall I feel that motion passed was fair on both sides - whether the consultation is conducted fairly remains to be seen ! After hearing this more and more a Catholic academy option should be evalauted in the consultation. Bay Jay you mentioned that earlier - am I right in understanding that if it is an academy the govt sponsors it so the Church will not have to pay £ 7 mil ?

Hello SHY6. If it was to be a Catholic Academy the church would be one of the Academy Sponsors, and so would be expected to put in some funds. However, it would be a lot less than would be required for a VA school. Here is some information about Academy Funding. However, it relates to conversions rather than new schools. I haven't found an equivalent link for new schools.

The '7 million' that is being widely quoted as the input to a VA school hasn't been confirmed. As far as I can tell it's just a rumour as there is no official reference for it (correct me if I'm wrong). The statutory requirement for church contributions to VA schools is 10% of capital costs, so that figure might imply that its going to cost £70million to purchase the land and convert the buildings. That is pure speculation on my part though. No official figures have been published (though some local councillors have seen the details I believe).

The £7 million came from me. In ChrisSquire Sat 17-Sep-11 11:23:56 I wrote ?The RCs may also have difficulty in finding their share of the £7 million+ needed to alter the site and equip it.?. I cannot now remember where I got the figure from but I think it very likely it came from a reliable source but of course it may have originally been ?up to £7 million . . ?

I also think that the Church would be expected to find just 10 % of that, i.e. £700,000. I regret that I will not have the opportunity for several days to do any research on this. They will not contribute a single penny to the cost of the site.

Note that this is for a new VA school - the Church have repeatedly said they do not wish to set up an academy.

The consultation will be on the proposal the Church puts forward, not on a choice of options. I think residents will be invited to choose which saint the school should be named after and that will be it. The Ric & Twic is in no doubt - its headline No school consultation.

Quite hard to believe that the Council would agree to pay £63 million for the site even if it is keen to have a Catholic school, but maybe there would be a grant from Central Government. But surely not that much in these "difficult economic times"!! I think I have read somewhere that the reason why the Catholic Church is applying for a VA school is because of the 50% rule ie. it doesn't want 50% openly non-Catholics in its schools - would rather have pretend or long-distance Catholics. I don't think it is involved in any new Academies where the 50% rule applies yet but interesting to see if that happens in future - maybe Richmond will break the mould.

ChrisSquire, I read it somewhere else too. I think it was quoted in a letter in the Richmond and Twickenham Times from one of the organisers of the Catholic school campaign, some time ago. From memory it was something like "the church are prepared to put 7 million into this school". It's then been re-quoted extensively elsewhere.

I saw that article in the RTT about the consultation too. I'm less cynical than you, so I just assumed the reporter wasn't quite following what was going on in the meeting, or left to go to the loo during the vote on the amendment. (For those who want to read it, I would post a link, but the electronic edition doesn't seem to be working at the moment. Copies are available at your local newsagent for 50p).

ChrisSquire, I don't necessarily agree that this "consultation will be on the proposal the Church puts forward". The Section 10 guidelines that the church are following say that the proposals cannot be published until the site has been secured. We know that their application indicated that it had been secured, but that the council have since said that it has not. So, even if Gove gives permission "in principle" for the proposals to be published, the church would have to delay publishing until the council makes the (key) decision to give them the site. To me that implies that the consultation will have to take place before publication.

LotieProsser, you're right that the Catholic Education service don't like the idea of opening up their admissions policies. However, if the Catholic community like the idea, then they may come to accept it as a way forward in securing this site. I certainly think the option of an Inclusive Academy should be included in the proposed consultation so that people who want faith-based education in a setting that doesn't exclude the wider community can have their voices heard.

Richmond and Twickenham Times e-edition is now working ok. There is an article about the Clifden Rd consultation on page 15. It incorrectly says there will be no consultation, when the council voted on Tuesday that there would be one (though we don't yet know its scope). There are also more letters about the Catholic school issue on page 33.

All - Just watched debate and caught on up the thread. Councillors made a hash of it and cant be trusted to work out anything. Big Society needs to take over and the RISC and Catholic groups should work out a solution !

Cllir True said there were 200 unfilled places at a Richmond school - others emphasised existing school in Richmond had relatively few first prefrences and that 93 per cent of Catholic children had to go out of borough.

Wouldn't a Catholic school help provide perhaps a school that offered something different from what existing school offer and which seem less than what is wanted by local parents.

Also how many of the so-called inclusive campaign parents locally actually send their children to independent schools - if it is anything like the national Accord supporters that would be quite a few

Overall I thought the debate on the webcase was a good one

Hello florist, and welcome to the thread. Its always good to have new voices posting. If you haven't done so already then I suggest you read the whole of both threads for all the background to this discussion. That will prevent a lot of repetition, as the points that you raise have all been raised before.

I agree that a Catholic school at Clifden would offer 'something different', and would impact Twickenham Academy less than a Community School. However the admissions systems of VA schools are very controversial (hence the debate!). A less controversial option would be a Catholic Academy, which would have at least 50% of its places open to the community. That option has been discussed extensively in this thread and the other thread that has been running parallel to this.

You are correct that there are unfilled places at some improving secondary schools (mostly at Richmond Park Academy). People are being asked to support those schools by sending their children there, even though their future is uncertain (though they are certainly being given lots of support). Many people think that the schools need the support of the Catholic community as much as everyone else, and that it would be unfair to grant one community an "opt out" from an initiative that everyone else is expected to support. Also, some forecasts are showing that those schools will fill up within a few short years, and additional community places will be required in the Twickenham area (see earlier in the thread for details of all that, and links to sources).

You are also correct that many Catholics children do currently go out of the borough, but in many cases the schools that they are travelling to are closer than the Clifden Road site will be. Also, there is a strong likelihood that the Linked School Policy may soon be dropped, subject to consultation. If that happens, some of those Catholic children will be able to stay within the borough and attend the more popular community schools (a choice currently denied to them).

Where do you get your information about where Accord supporters send their children to school? That doesn't ring true. Most of the people that I know who have signed the RISC petition send their children to local state primary schools. I know some supporters who send their children to independent schools, but only because they felt alienated by the admission policies of the state options. They have as much right to an opinion on this issue as anybody else.

"Wouldn't a Catholic school help provide perhaps a school that offered something different from what existing school offer" yes it would. but it would not be available to the majority of parents and childrne in Richmond borough.

I can't speak for all people supporting RISC but every person I know has their children at a state primary school and plans to send their childrne to a state secondary.

I'm not sure why your view wouldn't count though if you chose an independent school for your child or indeed even if you have no children. The fight is to make all new schools in Richmond inclusive. Why shouldn;t you be allowed an opinion on that whatever your circumstances?

There are people supporting the establishment of a catholic school who aren;t Catholic - is that allowed?

Thank you for these responses, though I am not convinced. If there is such demand for what you describe as inclusive schools then why aren't the existing places full. It is not clear to me why a community school on that site would actually deliver what parents wanted - now or in the future even with growth of admissions. Catholic admissions arrangements only seem to have become controversial as the failure of community schools became apparent with the publication of league tables etc. Don't Catholics pay taxes etc and if there is a site - and if Lib and Tories have said for years Richmond should have a Catholic school then surely it should be an option and not ruled out on the spurious grounds of inclusivity - Catholic schools tend to be as inclusive as community schools in terms of ethnic mix.
As for Accord just have a look at their supporters on their national website and you will see a number of high profile names whose own children spent some time in private schools - are you sure the RISC is not just against a Catholic school rather than a so-called non inclusive school. If so, you should have the intellectual honesty and confidence to make that case.