It's all about cash and nothing to do with Fort
10/12/09 23:13
You may have read in the press today that the Council suddenly claim they will save £6.5 million if Fort Primary is closed. Why wasn’t this brought out during the consultation, but suddenly made public just one week before the Councillors vote on the closure?
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.
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.