It's all about cash and nothing to do with Fort
This is yet another example of what the Council have done throughout this consultation. They link completely unrelated facts and then present a spurious conclusion.
As an example, they claim they have seen that a couple of overcrowded schools in Edinburgh are successful so therefore every school should be overcrowded to guarantee high attainment. This is a claim they have been unable to backup with any research - they repeatedly quote anecdotal evidence of other school mergers made under very different circumstances.
Now the Council reorganise their entire property portfolio and pretend this is based upon Fort closing.
This claim is completely outrageous, misleading, and has no validity whatsoever. In the briefing note that outlines the background to this saving, the Council claim that they will relocate 21 separate offices and sell 3 buildings “to achieve a capital saving of £5 million, plus annual recurrent savings”.
Be under no illusions; the council doesn’t have to close a school to do this and, with plenty of property available around the city, isn’t short of other choices. Are we really to believe that all these potential savings have only just been discovered? No, a serious amount of planning has gone into this proposal and was not brought out at any time during the so-called ‘consultation’. Again and again the Council have treated the idea of consultation as a sham and now they have done so again.
What else does this reveal about the proposal to close Fort? It is all about the money! We have constantly asked the council for the detailed steps they will take to ensure that our children’s education will not be harmed by this move. They have never responded in detail. This is not about children’s education or attainment. It is all about property and savings. There is no reason that they have to cut front-line education services to rationalise office facilities.
The Council are now also telling local Councillors that P1 class sizes will be less than they predicted during the consultation and as a result there will be no requirement for team teaching except in P4. They simply don’t know this. The enrolment period for P1 is not yet over and it is not possible to say whether class sizes will meet or even exceed their earlier prediction.
PLEASE. Email or phone your local Councillors, especially Steve Cardownie (529 3266), Elaine Morris (529 3279), Rob Munn (529 3290). Urge them to vote against this proposal. Remind them that they have a responsibility to their constituents who have all opposed this because 440 children’s education will be harmed. Tell them that you simply do not believe or trust the Council.
Submission to Adminstration Councillors
The paper, which is based upon our original submission, is available via the downloads page.
Steve Hodgson
Edinburgh Conservatives Seek To Save Schools
We will be continuing our efforts to persuade the other political groups in the Council to declare their positions.
The City of Edinburgh Council Conservative Group today announced its intention to seek to save Fort and Drumbrae Primary schools from closure when the matter comes before the Council on 17 December. Four schools are proposed for closure by the Lib Dem/SNP Administration and the Conservative Group is looking at the merits of each school individually. Having considered the case for Fort Primary and Drumbrae Primary the Conservative Group believes both should remain open.
Cllr Jeremy Balfour the Conservative spokesperson on Education, Children and Families said:"We believe the Lib Dem/SNP Administration is wrong about these two schools. We have been very impressed by the way parents at these schools have responded to the consultation on closure and have put forward a persuasive case as to why both schools have a future and should be saved.
“We have looked at the educational and financial issues very carefully before coming to this view. In the case of Fort, the proposed receiving school, Trinity, can’t be guaranteed to maintain educational standards for all and take the numbers of children involved. Nor can the proposal fully provide for the well documented additional educational support needs of some of the children transferring. At Drumbrae we do not believe the proposals take proper account of future population growth in the wider area. On top of these educational reasons the inability to sell the sites in the current economic climate means the financial benefits are very limited.”
Cllr Iain Whyte the Conservative Group Leader urged Councillors from every party to support the Conservative proposal to save these schools. He added:
"The whole school closure process is flawed as it does not take enough account of parental choice. If the Conservatives were running education in Edinburgh we would be looking at the school estate in a very different way and considering parent run, charitable trusts as a means of improving the reputations of schools with limited pupil numbers. I hope the Council will vote these proposals down as a welcome early Christmas present for children and parents of Fort and Drumbrae primary schools."
Highlighting the local dimension Cllr Allan Jackson, Conservative Councillor for Forth Ward said:
"The proposal to close Fort Primary and relocate the children to Trinity is one of the most ridiculous suggestions I have heard in my 30 plus years as a Councillor. The Fort building is to be retained for other uses so will still have to be maintained and staffed and there will be no capital receipt to the Council. The only saving will be the salaries of a few teachers who will be relocated to other schools in Edinburgh.
“With around 100 extra children going to Trinity it will be packed beyond its current capacity and many rooms currently used for science and computers will have to be used as basic teaching space. Facilities like the gym and dining halls will be unable to cope and the school will be stretched to breaking point. I have never received so many emails and letters on any issue. I call on the Council Administration coalition to drop this crazy idea now and avoid a whole lot of unnecessary grief.”
Don’t let the Council gamble with our children’s education
We have been told by Councillors that it is the biggest response that our local Councillors have had on any issue in several decades - and that it has been effective so far.
So, please keep it up! Trinity has always been one of the best schools at putting forward parents' views on important issues - so please do so again, however busy you may be - it is of absolutely critical importance NOW! This is your very last chance to get your message across. There are only a couple of weeks to go now until the Council decision on 17 December.
If you have written in before, please email or write in AGAIN, to make the Councillors realise that this is an extremely important issue for you and that you haven't forgotten it. If you haven't emailed or written in yet, please do so now. Ask them to vote against the Fort closure proposal and in favour of Fort's Alternative Proposal.
The official consultation for responses to the Council ended on 16 October, and the Parent Council's submission to the consultation is on our website - http://bit.ly/4zp3Eb. But you can still write in to Councillors now - their votes are the ones that count!
At the public meeting in September, Council officials were unable to persuade 180 parents that this proposal had any merit and will not harm our children. Absolutely nothing has changed since then.
So, what is the Council proposing, and what will our children lose? And why should you write in again?
Creating a P1 class of 39 pupils, and many other large classes. We all know that is no way to teach young children, and the best evidence fully supports this. Large classes are particularly bad for the earliest years and for children who are in most need of support, like many of the children at Fort. Our submission gives the Councillors all the evidence they should need on this.
Forcing 439 children into a school designed for 415 - 106% of its design capacity. That creates all sorts of problems with classroom space, dining facilities, gym, support for learning, loss of science room, library and all the other general space areas.
The Council may claim that this is comparable to Sciennes and South Morningside, which are popular, overcrowded schools with high attainment - but it isn't. Neither school was forced to merge with another school. They grew gradually because parents chose to send their children there.
It is not the same as 100 children from Fort, who have been well supported according to their needs, suddenly being forced to go to Trinity, increasing its roll by nearly one third to make it one of the most overcrowded schools in Edinburgh.
Trinity was the BEST primary school in the whole of Edinburgh in 2009 for writing (96%) and among the very best in reading and maths (91% and 92%). The Council claims that will be maintained or improve with classes of 39 in P1 and other large classes - no one believes that! They are risking all our children's education.
And what about Breakfast Clubs and After School Clubs? These are very important resources in Fort, Trinity and Victoria Schools - for 5 months since June, the Council has failed to provide ANY kind of answer as to how they could cater for this need properly, as well as many other important questions.
Given the Council's budget difficulties, all of this harm might just about be understandable (but never forgivable) if it was a long-term solution that produced huge revenue savings and significant capital receipts from selling Fort.
But, no, it doesn't on either count!
Quite apart from Fort giving the smallest savings of any of the proposed closure schools, it is the only one which is NOT going to be closed and sold - there won't be a single pound in Council coffers from selling Fort. If the Council agree to Fort's Alternative Proposal, the Council will still receive around £650,000 from selling Victoria Park Children’s Centre and they will still remove some spare school spaces from this area.
Fort is being mothballed in effect. The Council recognises that this is only a temporary measure. How short-sighted is that?
In the fastest growing area in the whole City, where the Council predicted, as recently as June this year, that 150 extra spaces would be required, the Council proposal leaves only 22 spaces between ALL the Trinity Academy catchment schools, Trinity, Victoria and Wardie. This is a complete waste of public money. Fort will be reopened in 2-3 years time, with huge disruption to 440 children's education, and unnecessary cost.
In the meantime, out of catchment siblings will be denied access to Trinity.
It is absolutely vital that you write in NOW to all your local Councillors, but particularly your Lib/Dem and SNP Councillors (and if you can, please also phone or meet them personally). Remember the Council is balanced 29-29 (Lib Dem/SNP v Lab/Con/Green) and ONLY ONE VOTE can change it. Education will be the most important matter on many parents' agendas - please let the politicians know the consequences if they don't vote the right way!
We CAN WIN this campaign - your Parent Council have been speaking to Councillors very regularly, and this is definitely in the balance - but it depends on our Councillors voting the right way - and on all of YOU persuading them to do so. It won't take long - please email or write again (details on our campaign website).
If you would like to discuss this, please contact me on 552 1036 or any of your Parent Council members (details on the newsletter)
Thank you - I know you won't let Trinity down.
Andrew Macmillan
School Rolls In The News
City education leader Marilyne MacLaren said: "Under-occupied schools are very expensive so we must be sure that Edinburgh's schools are full of pupils to offer the best possible education.
"Whilst school closures are painful, the process helps to reduce the number of costly empty places and enables us to offer greater breadth in the curriculum.
If the Council’s proposal to close Fort is approved, they will certainly achieve their aim to have full schools! Using the Council’s own figures and methods for predicting school rolls and capacity, next year Victoria will have just 3 spaces and Trinity will have just 17 spaces with the council predicting 439 children in a school that had capacity for 415 children for many years. Using the original capacity as guideline, Trinity would increase to 106% occupancy!
Fort have put forward an alternative proposal to retain Fort but reduce the surplus capacity. This proposal reduces spare places in this area but retains a school that will be required as the population in this area is expected to grow significantly over the next few years. In their first paper the Council anticipated that an additional 150 places will be required.
It’s also worth reading the Fighting for Fort website for their views on this article and for news on the closure proposal.
Please email or write to Steve Cardownie, Cammy Day, Allan Jackson and Elaine Morris or your own local councillor if you are not in Forth Ward - ask them how they intend to vote on this proposal and make it clear that you want them to vote against the closure of Fort as your elected representative.
Remind them that:
- Financially, the Closure Proposal is an extremely weak case.
- The Closure Proposal is only a temporary one, and not a cost-effective long term solution.
- The merger is not in the best interests, educationally and socially, of the pupils and community at Fort or Trinity.
- If this goes ahead there will only be around 20 spaces available in an area where the Council predicts 150 spaces will be required in the very near future.
- There is an alternative! The proposal to retain Fort removes surplus spaces from this area, generates capital savings but retains the capacity that the council anticipates will be required in this area.
You can read more of the background detail behind these points in our detailed submission to the council.
Schools (Consultation) (Scotland) Bill, passed by Parliament
We have continually argued that the needs of the children from Fort and Trinity have not been placed at the heart of this proposal and asked why HMIE have not been consulted on the proposal. The council had promised to follow the consultation requirements of the new Bill “as closely as the current legislation allows”.
Instead, they have failed to involve HMIE; they have failed to consult staff, children and prospective parents. As we saw at the public meeting, they have failed to provide any sort of detailed response to the question of how they will ensure the children continue to receive as good an education despite huge increases in class sizes, loss of facilities, break-up of composite classes and (in the case of the Fort children) loss of teaching staff.
They also increased the school’s notional capacity to 456 from its original design capacity of 415 without telling the parents or school, and moved our head to Fort while the consultation was still ongoing.
With less than a month do go till the vote on the closure proposal, this is the time to write to our four local councillors and remind them how strongly we oppose this proposal. Please email or write to Steve Cardownie, Cammy Day, Allan Jackson and Elaine Morris - ask them how they intend to vote on this proposal and make it clear that you want them to vote against the closure of Fort as your elected representative.
Remind them that:
- Financially, the Closure Proposal is an extremely weak case.
- The Closure Proposal is only a temporary one, and not a cost-effective long term solution.
- The merger is not in the best interests, educationally and socially, of the pupils and community at Fort or Trinity.
- If this goes ahead there will only be around 20 spaces available in an area where the Council predicts 150 spaces will be required in the very near future.
- There is an alternative! The proposal to retain Fort removes surplus spaces from this area, generates capital savings but retains the capacity that the council anticipates will be required in this area.
You can read more of the background detail behind these points in our detailed submission to the council.
Letter from Gavin Brown MSP
Mark Lazarowicz MP has also written to the council to oppose this proposal highlighting that this proposal is flawed both educationally and financially.
These letters both provide clear, summaries of the problems with these closures and are worth downloading and reading.
End of the consultation period
With the consultation period over, it is still really important that we continue to apply pressure to our local councillors and let them know that this proposal makes no sense for this area.
Only this week, the council have released the school occupancy rates for 2009 which show that Victoria Primary has a school roll of 129 this year, much higher than the anticipated figure. What does this mean for us?
If we apply the Council's own methodology for estimating Victoria's roll for 2010 the P7s will leave and be replaced by a P1 the same size as this year's. This means that Victoria will have a school roll of 142, an occupancy rate of 98% and would have just 3 spaces available!
If this proposal is approved Trinity will have 439 children, an occupancy rate of 96%, and only 17 spaces available! This means there are only 20 spaces available in an area where the Council predicts 150 spaces will be required in the very near future. These are the council's own figures.
Clearly this makes no sense and isn't a sensible plan for the long term
Please, keep writing to all our local councillors between now and December and let them know that you oppose this proposal and that it is not in the best interests of the children from Trinity or Fort. The Council's own proposal recognises that this is only a temporary measure and that the population growth in this area means that Fort must reopen in the near future. With potentially only 20 spaces remaining in the area if the proposal is approved the Council are gambling with our children's education.
Suport from Iain McGill, our Conservative Parliamentary Candiate
Dear Ms. Tee,
I am aware The City of Edinburgh Council is consulting on proposals to close Fort Primary School.
Having studied your proposals, and heard your reasoning at 2 public meetings with regards to Fort I am deeplyconcerned about your proposal and remain unconvinced that closure would be best way forwards.
Parental choice is important in education – and that it is not being given enough importance in this process –not just in Fort & Trinity Primaries, whose parents are making their preferences clear to all of us, but across the North of Edinburgh were a growing population demands more spaces in the local schools, not less.
Alongside the proposed closure of nearby Royston Primary this leaves no room for manoeuvre for parents who often make different choices for their children’s education than what is prescribed for them by your department. How do you future proof parental choice in the north of the city?
With Fort in particular the building is going to be retained anyhow, and their attainment is well above average when compared to similar schools – it has the potential to be a real success story, and to close it now seems unnecessary.
I am not convinced of your argument that a larger class size with team teaching is a benefit to pupils – who should be at the centre of this whole decision. What is best for the pupils? How does this sit with the Scottish Governments own research [the Class Sizes Working Group] that says for lower attaining children it is vital that they have smaller class sizes than 20, or their literacy falls by a whole year. This suggests to me that the children’s support needs would then increase, not decrease so the assumption that you can provide a better standard of education with less teachers spread around larger classes whilst taking away Positive Action Area status from the pupils does not add up.
I have seen no evidence of a proper consultation with the pupils as recommended by HMIe and the Children’s Commissioner.
Have you followed the Scottish Government guidance on determining capacities – Paragraph 18 of the Circularstates that they will need to consider specialist areas for the teaching of specific subjects – These include Science labs, Sports facilities, Craft workshops, Teaching kitchens, ICT rooms, Music rooms and studios, Art rooms, Libraries, TV, video and multi media rooms, Drama and studios plus other non-classroom areas such as general purpose rooms.
I am extremely concerned at the lack of provision, if this merger goes ahead, of facilities for breakfast club and after school club. The idea of a whole schools worth of pupils being bussed/route marched from Fort to Trinity and back again for their clubs seems ridiculous. As does going into consultation with no clear plan for this – just vague words to reassure us it is being looked at.
I am happy to support the parents alternative proposal, giving capital receipts, revenue savings, allows spare capacity for future growth and gives the pupils the best possible chance in smaller class sizes. In your 2007 document you see similar possibilities:
“Fort Primary is well located to provide integrated early years and community learning and development services in an area of high deprivation and considerable need; and it offers the opportunity to realise the vision of integrated early years and childcare services approved by the Council.” and ”The Fort site offers the opportunity for delivery of an integrated campus with primary school facilities alongside the existing community facilities and enhanced early years service.”
For these reasons I am not able to support your proposal, and would urge you to consider ways to keep the school open, as the parents and children wish.
Yours truly,
Iain McGill
Conservatives Westminster PPC, Edinburgh North & Leith
Crowded classrooms in the news
A report in the Evening News today shows us more of the reality behind the situation at schools like these. It's worth quoting some of the views of parents twhose children attend Sciennes which, like Trinity, is a very good school.
CHILDREN are being taught in corridors, eating lunch in classrooms and taking playtimes in "shifts" at an overcrowded primary which has seen an influx of new pupils this year. A cloakroom has also had to be turned into another teaching area at Sciennes Primary to cope with the extra demand on space caused by the record number of primary-ones going into the school.
The conditions at the school were described as "unacceptable" by one local MSP, while parents said they felt the problems could undermine their children's education.
One parent, whose child started P1 this term, said: "It's still a good school, but this flood of children into P1 is just beyond the pale. The staff are doing all they can, of course, but it is undermining a lot of their good work.
"One of the things that appealed about Sciennes in the first place is that it is obviously a very caring and supportive environment, but this situation is threatening to destroy that whole ethos."
One of the reasons behind this situation came about because of legal challenges from parents who wished their children to go to the school. As a result, rulings forced the city council to increase P1 class sizes to 30, going against its own policy – and national "guidance" – of capping all P1 classes at 25.
It's important to highlight just how much this situation is a parallel for what is proposed at Trinity. Parents complaining of class sizes of 40 at the biggest primary in Edinburgh with 643 children. If the proposal for Fort/Trinity goes ahead we face class sizes of 39 in a school that has always had a capacity of 415 up till now.
Keep writing to your local councillors and those from Leith Ward. Let them know that this proposal makes no sense.
Public Meeting
The panel made much of the aspect of parental choice that would mean that many of the children from Fort might choose not to go to Trinity but go elsewhere. What was clear was they place great store by this parental choice when it suits them but will happily deny it to our out-of-catchment parents if this move goes through. Please remember that it is THEIR proposal that all the children come here and that is what we need to prepare for. don't allow them to talk down the potential impact.
The council faced a large number of very tough questions this evening and I'm sure it was clear to everyone there that this proposal has not been fully thought through and that the needs of our children have not been given sufficient importance.
At the end of the evening Andrew Macmillan presented a summary of the key points of the meeting from our point of view. You can read the full text of that presentation on the front page of the website.
What are the key points to take from the meeting?
Despite any appearances to the contrary, the outcome of the consultation has NOT been decided and it's very important to highlight that the people on the panel will not be making the final decision. It is our local councillors and those from Leith who will be voting on this proposal and thus it's a political decision.
We all need to make our opposition to this proposal known to the council before the 16th of October and submit specific questions to the consultation. Even if you have already done so, write to all our local councillors (both Leith and Forth wards), meet with them in surgeries and make it clear that you want them to vote for what is best for our children. You can find contact details of everyone involved on the who's who page.
If you have any feedback on the meeting, or questions you would like answered you can email mail@trinityparentcouncil.org.uk or hamrun@gmail.com.
Thanks again,
Steve Hodgson
Trinity/Fort in the news
If you can, please take the time to read the article and also checkout some of the background to this proposal on the campaign website here.
In the article the city's education leader Marilyne MacLaren is quoted as saying "these concerns have been somewhat exaggerated". We should all be under no illusions - the numbers we have been highlighting are
the council's own figures and this is what we need to prepare for. If you have received the council's newspaper 'Outlook' this week you may have seen an article on the closure of Fort - nowhere in that article does it mention the impact on class sizes at Trinity nor does it make clear that the closure of Fort is anticipated to be temporary
due to the population growth expected in this area in the next few years. Given this biased report that they are pushing out at taxpayers expense it is perhaps a bit rich for the council to talk of concerns being exaggerated.
Regards,
Steve Hodgson
School closures in the City's Outlook Newspaper
The article presents a number of 'Facts and Figures' to support the case for school closure but is clearly not an impartial article and also provides an opportunity for the council to distribute a misleading message to the parents affected by the closure and demonstrates (once again) their contempt for the consultation process.
This article has provided the council with an opportunity to propaganidise the case for closure (at tax payers' expense) while those who are against closure have no such platform to make our case.
At no point in the article does is make clear that Fort will not be closed but is being retained for the future population growth expected in this area. The article does not highlight the impact on the receiving schools and the class sizes of 38 in P1, 33 in P2, 37 in P3 that are being anticipated at Trinity. Instead the article points out that the closures can (not 'will' or 'do') bring educational benefits. Like the council's own proposal, nobody has yet identified what these benefits will be.
We have written to the editor of the Outlook newspaper to complain about this article.
Presentation to the Education Children and Families Committee
During their session, Fort presented an alternative proposal to the committee that would allow Fort to remain open while closing Victoria Park Child and Family Centre, to combine it with Fort’s early years centre. This proposal addresses the council's need to reduce surplus capacity at the school and also generate capital from the sale of the Victoria Park Child and Family Centre. As well as avoiding the overcrowding of Trinity and loss of community at Fort, this proposal avoids one of the fundamental problems with the council's proposal, the fact that Fort would only close temporarily and there would be additional costs associated with the conversion from a school and then back again. This is a proposal that we feel should be taken seriously by the council as if reflects the needs of this area and puts the needs of the individual children first.
Our presentation was focused upon the impact to Trinity of accommodating the additional children from Fort and the high levels of overcrowding that would result from this move. In particular we highlighted the huge class sizes that would result from this move, the loss of the specialist rooms that are presently within the school and the practical difficulties in running the schol with this level of overcrowding. The councillors took the opportunity to question us on the detail of the changes within the school, the background to the 'creation' of the 15th classroom and the safety of the routes to school of children travelling from Fort.
During the question and answer session we were also asked our views on how circumstances had changed since the previous proposal to close Fort and merge with Trinity was dismissed in 2004. Our viewe on this is that, aside from the creation of a convenient additional classroom, little has changed - the school roll has only fallen slightly and the only significant change is in the council's budget.
The presentation we made to the committee is available through the downloads page of the website.
The Fort presentation is now also available through the downloads page.
Public Meeting on the 29th
After this presentation by the Parent Council next week, there will be a public meeting at the school on the 29th of September. This is a good opportunity to speak directly with council officials, local councillors and members of parliament regarding this proposal and the effect on the school and also to make your views known. Please put this date in your diary.
A quick reminder, if you are coming to the public meeting and you require free childcare or a translator, please telephone (0131) 529 2108 no later than 15 September 2009.
Trinity Community Council
They have also said they will attend the public meeting on the 29th to support us.
Forth Ports developments
Primary school closures to cost city £1.5m
Burdiehouse Primary - £790,000
Drumbrae - £605,000
Clermiston - £330,000
Granton Primary - £91,000
Trinity Primary - £15,000
Yes, that’s right, in order to accommodate the closure of Fort the council believes that Trinity requires only 0.8% of this investment! To put things further into context, that’s less than one third of the on-the-road price of the Lord Provost’s BMW 730d, which also carries a number plate valued at £500,000!
Clearly the council’s view is that only very minor changes are required at Trinity to provide the facilities and space required to accommodate an additional 96 children.
In order to make class sizes of 38 and 33 work, we apparently only require a partition wall to be built and some doors added to the school. The question for the council is a simple one; how can they convince us they are not sacrificing our children’s education for the sake of the budget?
Councillors' Surgeries
Council consultation papers released
The parent council has been invited to make a representation to the council on the 8th of September and we will take the opportunity to make our case on that date.
The public consultation at the school takes place on the 29th of September and provides us all with a good opportunity to make our opposition to this proposal clear.
Malcolm Chisholm supports campaigns to keep fort and Royston open.
Council announces dates for public consultations
It has also been announced that the consultation papers, which will outline the case for closure for each of the schools, will be made public on Monday.
The parent council has been invited to put our case directly to councillors via a deputation at the next education committee on 8 September. We will attend this meeting in order to challenge the council’s proposal. All parents at Trinity will soon receive a newsletter with more information on the campaign but please keep checking here for the latest news.
Fort meeting with councillors
There is scheduled to be a public consultation on the proposal to close Fort in the community wing at Fort from 7:00pm to 9:00pm on Tuesday 22nd September with another consultation at Trinity that same week. Once we have any more details they well be posted here.
SNP Leith Residents' Survey
If you are concerned about the proposed closure of Fort Primary and the transfer of all the children from there to Trinity in 2010/2011, this my be a good opportunity to raise this issue with the party who form part of the coalition in control of the city council. This is, of course, the same party that previous made an election commitment to significantly reduce class sizes. The commitment they made to P1 class sizes of 18 seems impossible to reconcile with the anticipated P1 class size of 38 at Trinity if this proposal goes through!
Steve Hodgson