New Secondary Schools for Richmond 3

[BayJay]

Hello and welcome to the Mumsnet thread about Richmond Borough Secondary Schools. The discussion started in February 2011 in two parallel locations here and here.

In November 2011 the most active of those two threads, in Mumsnet Local, reached 1000 messages (the maximum allowed) so we continued the conversation here.

Now its May 2012 and that thread has also filled up, so the conversation will continue here ......

TheMagicFarawayTree,

a) Just because something has been promised for years does not, in anyway, make it one percent more justifiable- its irelevant.

b) it's opening would not be to the detriment of any existing borough school -- On the Contary it would be 90% funded by all of us the local taxpayers so it would be a total waste of money for most of us, in times when taxpayers money is stretched desperately.

The Catholic Church is one of the richest institutions in Europe,( if not in the whole world, apparantly). So why on earth cannot should everyone else support and pay for it,when it could easily fund itself?

Other Faith schools, (that date back to before Free state Education) provided their land and premises that they already owned, free to the community but that's the worse thing about this school...... the Catholic Church is not even doing that!

It would be given FREE the Clifden road site!! In an area where sites are very rare and very expensive. It should supply its own site at the very least, as previous Faith schools have done. So it is terrible value for Richmond Borough Taxpayers.

c) Catholic children are struggling to get places in Catholic schools now, and when they do get in, their journeys are often long and difficult.

---- Of course no-one forces children of Catholic parents to try and go to a far away school. That is an extra choice available to them, but not to others. A child of Catholic parents needs an education (eg PE and Maths lessons, and moral guidance and socialising with his peers) all of which is covered in any school.

They do not need to be segregated, they need to learn to live and learn in a diverse world. If their home enviroment plus attending their church on Sunday is not enough to make them follow their parents religion, then they are not going to follow it anyway.
Every child of Catholic Parents who attends Clifden road will force another local child to have to attend Richmond Park, with no choice at all. Zero.

d) there will, no doubt, be another school, on the Edgerton Road site, or another one.
----There is no guarantee at all of this. And it would be too late. The Egerton site would be a much better site for any Catholic School, because any sensible, non-biased Council should sort out Schools for the most urgent pressing need first. It is a need to have a school place. The luxury of choice of places clearly is always second after that. A specialised minority-interest school could come second only if Taxpayers money not already exhausted.

The councils OWN figures assumes that there must be an inclusive free school locally otherwise there SIMPLY will not be enough Secondary school places in 2013. If they assume it, then should provide a site for it now, not when it will be way too late!

e) a Catholic school would add to, not take away from, the diversity of schools available in the borough.

- It is a diversity of schools only available to one group of people. There are so many other minority groups with no schools at all. Catholic schools locally have the lowest free meals percentage and St James made the National press becuase its free school meal percentage was SO low!
They do not increase diversity in any real way whatsoever! All a Catholic school would do is increase segregation. And divide communities.

f) Catholic children deserve the opportunity to remain in a Catholic school in-borough, not be forced to leave it.
-- It is the parents choice, It is an extra option so clearly no force involved!

Actually it is the Taxpayers of Richmond who deserve a sensible, fair council to provide decent schools for all first, and only after they have met that then possibly they could they consider frittering money on special interest group schools.

How can a Council Leader who is know to be catholic decide fairly on this matter?? It is scandalous and like Westminster, his special interest should preclude him from being involved.

TwoCotbeds - why do you feel you are qualified to tell Catholic parents what their children need.

blinkblink, even the council would say that there is a demand for a Catholic schools, rather than a need for one. (see para 4.17).

Usually the government, at local and National level will provide what Adults and Children actually "need" not what people would prefer or demand. It is a need for children to receive an education, eg lessons in Maths, English, good behaviour standards etc etc.

It is perfectly usual for parents to hand on their own personal choice of religion to their children without the school the children attend helping them.

How do all the religious Jewish, Muslim etc parents pass their relgion on to their children or attempt to, without schools to support them? I believe there are large communities of other religions in the UK that do not have state funded schools to assist them with that.

IF you argue Catholic Parents have a need for a school to help them, then you must accept that those other religions have the same need to! How would the public purse ever afford all that? crazy.

Please tell me if you can, how you can justify one groups desire to pass on their beliefs but not recognise other groups same desire?? I'd genuinely would like anyone's answer to that !

In a time when every taxpayer pound is needed for basic key services, hospitals, and all other true essentials of life, there should be no money wasted on a 'preference' or 'demand' of any parents.

Is it so difficult to pass on a Catholic Faith to Children in these modern times, that can only possibly be achieved with all three: Home plus Church, plus School all working together? How do other faiths manage ? Are they much stronger ??

A relgion that has lasted so many hundreds of years and manages to survive in plenty of heavily Catholic countries which do not have state funded faith schools, does not need our money in the UK for parents to pass it on to their children.

It is not a need of a child. It is a prefernce of the Parents.

These are Real Needs........
Children with special needs; they do need extra, special help at school. Children with a disability may need special help with access. Also adopted or fostered children have a recognised need for more continunity in their lives so quite rightly, they are all prioritised in the admissions process. These children have a actual need.

A child may grow up, as many do, not to follow their parents religion. It is an individual and personal decision to make for the child as they grow up. It is not a "need" of the child to follow their parents previous choice. They need freedom and information to make up their own mind.

In fact, one easily could argue the opposite! That a child from a religious background needs a non-religious school enviroment to see both sides, to best decide for themselves as they grow up, what, if any religion they wish to follow.

I think some parents simply use their religion to obtain more education choices than everyone else. They may even be a little dis-illusioned with their faith, say, or simply un-enthusiastic, but are encouraged to keep attending a Church because the system is set up to motivate them to do so. Crazy system.

Nationally I think only 10% of the adult population are actually actively religious but MUCH more than 10% of school places, I think , are 'religious' (ie in a Faith school). This is a miss-match.

Please, please someone find what the church attendance figures are in areas with Faith schools, compared to those without local Faith Schools! It would be so interesting.

Heliview - maybe your point is too subtle for my simple mind but if you too are suggesting that you know better what is right for other parents' children then I find that has rather worrying implications. What precisely is the difference between a demand for such a school (in a borough where a number of existing secondary schools are undersubscribed) and a need.

twocotbeds - your post is interesting in that it is exercised around determining for other people what is their need - what is important to them and their children. Catholic families want the freedom to educate their children in the way that they see as appropriate. What is the insight that you have in respect of what other children need that their parents don;t themselves have?

Heliview, that's a really interesting point.

What is the view of the RISC humanists on this interesting piece?

www.iea.org.uk/in-the-media/media-coverage/freedom-in-education-%E2%80%93-catholics-versus-humanists

Catholic families want the freedom to educate their children in the way that they see as appropriate.//// This is meaningless. I'd like the freedom not to pay such high taxes locally for a council that sets up New schools which excludes my child. Catholic Families already have extra choices the rest of us do not have, now they want even more. How much 'freedom' do they have compared to the rest of us with zero choice?
I'd like the freedom to stop all the discrimination against non-catholics and non-religious people in school admissions.

What is the insight that you have in respect of what other children need that their parents don;t themselves have? /// I have an insight as I understand children are not owned by parents and should be free to make their own decisions in life as they grow up. They also need not to be segregated from each other.

I notice you have not answered my question, which is a shame, because I'd like to hear your answer.

Anyway from one parent to (presumably) another, I'll wish you good night.
I know ultimately we all want the best for our children.

maybe your point is too subtle
blinkblink & TwoCotbeds, this debate started (many moons ago) with people making precisely the points you are both making now. I think we can all agree that there is disagreement on those points.

blinkblink, I referred you to that paragraph from the council paper because the law says that if the council needs a new school they have to consider an Academy (which could still be a Catholic Academy) ahead of a VA school.

The council are now in a very difficult position. They bought a prime site to provide for much needed future school places. However, if they now say they need a school then they won't be able to accept the VA proposal.

Some people would argue that they have already said (before they realised the implications of the law change) that they need this VA school. They are therefore on very dodgy ground. If they don't recognise that, and press ahead with accepting the proposal on Nov 24th, then the Judicial Review could well make mincemeat of them.

"and press ahead with accepting the proposal on Nov 24th"
May 24th, not Nov 24th.

The ironic thing is that for the first time in living memory the Government is actually prioriting funds for local demand rather than need. They call it the Free School programme. However, under that programme all proposing groups have equal status. In Hampton, a bid from the Maharishi Foundation will be considered on its merits alongside a bid from the Church of England. Perhaps both, or neither, will be funded. However, they will be judged on the quality of their proposal, and their proof of local demand, rather than on the status of their respective groups in the Establishment.

I hope that if the Catholic community of Richmond don't get their local VA school, then they will put forward a proposal for a Catholic Free School instead. Another alternative would be for the council to invite proposals for a Catholic Academy.

I am afraid though BayJay, that in the Catholic community and others, Risc have lost any respect that they had by by getting into bed with the BHA who are actively campaigning against all state funded faith schools.

Jeremy Rodell himself has admitted on the R&T times website that he could not support a Catholic academy or free school because of the 50% admissions policy.

The South West London Humanists campaigned against a new CofE school in Kingston which was to have an inclusive admissions policy because they did not want to see another church school in Kingston.

I see no reason to think that his arguments would change if the VA school does not go ahead because, he is ideologically against faith schools.

I know that on this site, just as in the community at large there are strong views on this issue, but I honestly believe that there is room for everyone to be happy.

Sorry, I should have said - I honestly believe that there is room for almost everyone to be happy.

I understand that those who would prefer that faith schools did not exist at all (whether Catholic or other) would not be so.

Magic, in North Kingston there was an open competition between a church school and a community school. The Schools Adjudicator made the final decision, based on the quality of the bid. Here is the determination.

There was a local campaign against the CofE school, and I understand that the SW London Humanist Group were involved in organising that campaign. They have every right to make their views public on such issues, and others can decide whether or not they agree with them.

RISC's steering group is made up of people with a range of religions and world-views, not just Humanists, and their campaign is pro-inclusivity rather than anti-faith school. In that respect their position is different to the BHA's. The BHA fully acknowledges that, and their press release makes it clear their involvement in this case is only on the basis of challenging the process that has been used to avoid competition.

"Jeremy Rodell himself has admitted on the R&T times website that he could not support a Catholic academy or free school because of the 50% admissions policy."
Magic, just to add, you are right about this. However, the Diocese would take the exact same view - they are opposed to an Academy for exactly the same reason. Nevertheless an Academy or Free School has always been the compromise option that would allow the most people (though not all people) to be happy.

BayJay, you are more clever than that - the involvement of the BHA is very significant. This is one step in their campaign to end faith schools.

To allow the opportunity for all Catholic children who leave the borough every year to stay here and be educated we would need two or even three Catholic free schools or academies.

I think that the route of one Catholic VA school, which not even meet the demands of local children; some would still need to leave the borough and other, non-faith schools, including your Free School is a great compromise in itself.

This is one step in their campaign to end faith schools
I don't disagree, and I don't suppose the BHA would either, but its just one small step in what will undoubtedly be a very long journey.

To allow the opportunity for all Catholic children who leave the borough every year to stay here and be educated we would need...
There's that word "need" again. I suspect a lot is going to ride on that little word in coming weeks!

I just hope that if there is to be a judical review that this happens sooner rather than later.

Then (as long as the school is lawful of course) we can get on with it without delay.

Assuming that the council make the decision to proceed.

Oh, and if you agree with the BHA motives, do you still feel comfortable with their involvement? It can't sit that well with you given that you have chosen a faith school for your children.

do you still feel comfortable with their involvement?
I don't agree with their education policy, but I respect their right to pursue it, and I understand and respect their reasons for backing this JR. Its an important piece of legislation that needs to be clarified.

As I've said before in this thread, my own views are in line with the Accord Coalition, and the BHA are a member of that coalition.

I think its reasonable for an organisation to have an "idealistic" position and a more realistic "compromise" position, and to work towards both simultaneously.

The opposition to Catholic schools is from a cross section of supporters including the majority of Anglicans, not because they are anti faith schools, but because they do not support exclusive privilege to 1 faith group.
Its shocking that despite knowing the strength of opposition, the Catholics want to go ahead with current proposals - where is the desire for community integration and harmony?
I agree that it comes to judicial review, it should be decided asap, but these things can drag for months. Its in no ones interest to not have a school in 2013. So it would be better to have the fairer and legitimate option of having the Clifden Free school.

Jo Twick - when you talk about the majority of Anglicans - I guess you are talking about the Anglicans who responded to the consultation. Yes 55% of the 529 Anglicans that responded were against the proposal.

But there are other figures that you ignore...
58% of 'other Christians' support the proposal.
15% of the people who do not agree with the school actually think that there should be no School on the site. So not necessarily against a Catholic school, but not wanting any school there at all!

I could go on and and give stats to back up my case, as could you. That's the thing with statistics I guess, you can make of them what you will and also guess at the reasoning behind them.

There is opposition, nobody can deny that but faith and non-faith primary schools have a fantastic relationship within this borough. There is no issue of lack of community integration and harmony at primary level is there? The lack of integration at secondary level is primarily because Catholics feel forced into leaving the borough at secondary level.

A Catholic VA school goes some way to actually solve this problem!

I wish any new Free School application luck, but alongside a Catholic VA school, not instead of it.

The existing schools do exist for valid historical reasons . But you need to realise that they have caused segration in society, made people go private or move homes because they. Did not belong to the required faith.
I agree that only now lot of people have woken up to this injustice or spoken up against . Let's not live in the past and understand the current and future need for inclusive education.

You need to reflect upon why no one is objecting to Hampton church school or why CoE parents are sending their kids to local schools - they want to integrate and have their schools for benefit of entire community.no one is stopping catholic kids from attending borough schools - u r not choosing them and integrating with rest of community and have choices of outside catholic schools

no one is stopping catholic kids from attending borough schools
Actually, the Linked School policy did stop children from Catholic primaries from attending some local secondaries, and that is an injustice which has now been righted, with the dropping of the policy (for Sept 2013 entry). Some Catholic families will in future choose Orleans Park and Teddington, in the same sort of proportions as they currently choose Waldegrave. Others will still prefer Catholic secondaries.