| Topic: | Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Re:Fiona Millar Patronises Acton Residents | |
| Posted by: | Toby Young | |
| Date/Time: | 11/12/09 16:56:00 |
| I didn't think Fiona Millar's arguments on Newsnight were particularly strong -- but then, I wouldn't. The argument that a new, parent promoted school in Acton would take money away from Acton High School is a red herring. We believe that there is a need for an additional four form entry secondary school in Acton and that, therefore, it ought to be funded by the money Labour has put aside in the Building Schools for the Future budget to provide for the creation of new schools. You could argue, as Fiona did -- and Iain Muir does in this thread -- that Ealing already has plans in place to create a new school and expand provision in some of its existing schools to accommodate the anticipated increase in demand. However, the new school is going to be in Greenford and the only Acton school that's going to be expanded is Twyford -- and only by one form of entry. Quite apart from that, we believe Ealing Council has under-estimated the increase in demand and we're trying to prove that at present. If we can, we'll be able to press our funding case under the present rules -- and that will mean extra money for a new school in Acton, not taking money away from AHS. If we fail to convince the Department of Children, Schools and Families to fund the school under the existing funding model we'll have the option of applying for funding under the new funding model that the Tories will put in place if they win the election. Under that model, our school won't receive a capital grant that will be created by diverting funds from the budget for Ealing's existing plans -- Ealing will get £300 million from BSF regardless of the outcome of the election. The Tory model will be to give New Academies a per capita building allowance and out of that groups like ours will either have to rent building space or finance the loans they've taken out to build new schools. Now, it may be that in order to create a pot of money to do that, the new Secretary of State at the DCSF will have to divert money from BSF. However, if they did that the money would not come from Ealing's allocation under BSF which, as I say, is safe. So however we finance our school and whoever wins the next general election the money will not come from Ealing's schools. The only legitimate objection that can be made -- and this is one Fiona was struggling to make on Tuesday night -- is that once our school has been built it may result in AHS becoming under-subscribed and, if that happens, AHS would receive less money than it would if it was fully subscribed. But it wouldn't receive less money per pupil -- it's per capita funding would remain constant so there would be no reason why its students would suffer. In any event, I think it's pessimistic to think AHS would end up under-subscribed. If critics of our school think it might pose a threat to AHS what they're effectively saying is that if parents had any choice about whether to send their children to AHS they will choose not to. But that is to underestimate AHS. I'm sure that parents will continue to send their children there even if they have a choice. In short, the argument that our school will divert resources from other secondary schools in Ealing -- including those yet to be built -- is complete balls. One other point: We haven't got our estimates of Ealing's population over the next ten years wrong. If no new school is built in Acton, local parents will not even be guaranteed a place at AHS. They will have to do what parents in other parts of London are routinely forced to do, namely, send their children to schools many miles away and have no guarantee that they'll be able to send all their children to the same school. Critics of our plans who say "They should just send their children to AHS and have done with it" don't seem to have grasped this point. As an East Acton resident I probably wouldn't be able to get any of my children into AHS -- I don't live close enough. |