Advertising on state school property - legal?

[Nigello]

There are more tacky and large plastic banners advertising tennis/dance/after-school clubs on school railings. Can state schools do this? I think they?re not right for such public realm places especially when they clash with and obscure the beauty of the architecture and railings (or, even worse, cover up gardens and ponds which we?ve all paid for.)

The head of the school told me he needs to raise ?? so puts them up to attract punters to the clubs that use his (our) property. I suggested school emails and social media (you know, like it was 2010 or something) but heard no more.

I?d like to know what others think and, more relevant, whether anyone could point to a law or regulation that supports the head?s stance - or otherwise, hopefully.

[oimissus]

So these are clubs that take place on the school property, but for the general public?

I don?t have a problem with it. I think they can be very effective as a method of publicising a club or event and London schools have had their budgets slashed. Unfortunately architectural beauty comes second to raising the money needed to keep the school going for the children.

I would lobby my MP rather than the HT.

[MrsR]

Possibly a planning issue??? This guide is very long but may help.

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/11499/326679.pdf

[Nigello]

If we all pay for the schools, whether we use them or not, then we all have a say. Also, the neutral position is to not use schools (or doctors' surgeries, etc.) as places to advertise private businesses. We have boundless opportunities to do this for nothing on social media or via the school and PTAs, etc. There is too much clutter and advertising are gaining from this, nobody else.

[oimissus]

So the schools gain nothing at all from hiring out their halls during the holidays for private businesses to use?

I'm still not sure I understand. Are these businesses using the school's premises?

[Nigello]

The schools can get cash from the firms that use the premises - after school club/dance club/language club/church group.

[oimissus]

So the school benefits from these groups being successful. It's in their interests for these clubs to be held. If they're not successful they'll stop being held and the schools buildings will be empty and unprofitable during the holidays. And the children will suffer.

Like I said, the issue is school funding. Lobby your MP, don't have a go at the school's HT for simply trying to keep his school's head above water. The clubs presumably pay for this advertising - it must work otherwise why would they bother?

School railings are often covered with banners that are to do with the school's own activities, like the summer fair. Would you ask the HT to remove those as well?

[j.a.]

The schools desperately need the money. Got to say I think the fact that headteachers are having of do this is more important than the need to look at metalwork, flowerbeds and water features, as pleasing as they may be (and I don?t dispute that).

This os kids education we?re talking about. The headteachers aren?t doing it to pay for new furniture in the staff room, it?ll be for, you know, books and teachers.

[Nigello]

Oimissus - thanks for your input. I shall ignore it. The school is the one that is putting up the banners, not my MP. I don't think they are needed. As I said, state property ought to be neutral and not used to advertise anything.

The schools can have successful outcomes without blighting property with (often amateurish), plastic banners. Use emails, social media, text messages and WhatsApp, etc. Covering up the beauty of the gardens, etc. (paid for by public purse) in the attempt to scrabble a few more quid (because I cannot believe the advertising this way actually garners many new club members) seems counter intuitive and, well, a bit stupid.

And as for summer fairs, yes - remove them also once the event is over.

[j.a.]

Mate, that is first-class Nimbyism. Nicely done, good to see people still putting in the effort these days.

I mean come on; a state school is reduced to raising money like this because they *don?t get enough from the government to educate children*, but you feel it?s more important to harass a headteacher because you want to see the flowers on their ground.

I might point out that the flowers aren?t actually on public property so I?m not sure your logic about you being entitled to look at them holds up, but I can see you?ve made up your mind about what?s most important here so I?ll get out of your way. After all, those entitled and hubristic emails won?t write themselves?

[Nigello]

Advertise away, but do it in a 2022 way and not by cluttering up a perfectly attractive environment with polyurethane tat. I thought good parents had STRONG OPINIONS on advertising corrupting their children's minds? Maybe only when it suits.

[j.a.]

Ok, so anyone who disagrees with you isn?t a good parent? And a hoarding on a fence that stops you from seeing some flowers while advertising a sports club is somehow ?corrupting children?s minds??

Yeah, you?re just trolling now.

[wordsworth]

j.a. Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Ok, so anyone who disagrees with you isn?t a good

> parent? And a hoarding on a fence that stops you

> from seeing some flowers while advertising a

> sports club is somehow ?corrupting children?s

> minds??

>

> Yeah, you?re just trolling now.

Well said!

[Nigello]

No, not trolling at all, just pointing out some discrepancies some (not you, but maybe because you seem somewhat invested) and underlining the fact that state bodies (in this case, a school) shouldn't be advertising anything on their property, especially when the ads are tacky and ugly and made of stuff that will take decades to decompose. That's all.

[womanofdulwich]

Sometimes, as a parent speaking, its very helpful to have an after schoolclub in the same building.

[Nigello]

I am sure, but does it need to advertise on public property? If they do, why shouldn't the local locksmith, wine bar or chippy have the same opportunities? I like private business and the idea of kids doing stuff with their time that is beneficial, just not with a beautiful school being made to look ugly with naff, plastic banners whilst teh teachers and staff can bugger off home and don't have to look at them!

[womanofdulwich]

Some people do not look around them , not like you,as a gardener. They just go to school, drop off, and go straight to their next thing ( like working at a desk/shop/ caring for others), they are more likely to pay attention to something in front of them. Were you involved in the school garden by chance? Some people dont read well, or research everything and work on suggestions, especially those put right in front of them, plus the children will see them and have nagging rights. The school clubs are also for the benefits of children at the school, whilst wine bar and chippies less so. I think you should approach said school about a children's gardening club, and stealthily change their tasteless ads by having far superior tasteful ones.

[diable rouge]

Nigello, your OP asks whether advetising on a state school is legal, yet a few posts above you state as fact that ''state bodies (in this case, a school) shouldn't be advertising anything on their property...''.

Can we then deduce that since your OP you've found out that it is indeed not legal, or are you mistaking your opinion for a fact?

[jazzer]

Nigello Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Advertise away, but do it in a 2022 way and not by

> cluttering up a perfectly attractive environment

> with polyurethane tat.

Please explain what other material they should use that you will be happy with. Potentially the banners will be used year after year, so that negates your argument on that point.

I thought good parents had

> STRONG OPINIONS on advertising corrupting their

> children's minds? Maybe only when it suits.

"advertising corrupting their children's minds" - If it's MacD's, KFC, pizza brand this, that and the other etc I'd totally agree, but these are clubs that contribute financially to the school which helps the school deliver, well schooling. What is wrong with that?

Does it offend your principles? Let's have a vote, those in favour say I, those against say Neigh. Then in a weeks time we can count up the scores and see who the people of ED support, You or the School, Simple.

And before you then start blaming local and national Govt, the Head is doing what they can to raise revenue, in my eyes it's a win:win. The school benefits, the children benefit and those running and attending the "clubs" benefit.

What's your next point, pray tell??

[Nigello]

Hmm - lots of assumptions and Trojan horses. School clubs are great but advertising them on public property isn't, especially when they are naffly designed, placed near each other and left to fall off and flap around and eventually fall off as litter, and detracting from lovely pieces of architecture and when other ways of free and effective advertising are available. As for what I mean by SHOULDN'T - its meaning is really ought not to, not that they are banned by law from doing so. It's my preference, is what I mean, but I have not yet been told definitively by the council whether or not state enterprises, which we all pay for, should be used for advertising. Pretty simple and not something anything or anyone here can dissuade me from.

[jazzer]

So your opinion is schools are great, adverting is not.

Get Real

[TWB Cat Sitter]

Sounds like a 1st world problem to me. Oh to be so privileged.

[Nigello]

Schools are good, beauty is good, neighbourliness is good, kids having positive experiences is good, employment is good, learning new stuff is good (all or most of this has been said by me already but I repeat as a service to those who CBA to read what has come before). What is not good is using state property to advertise selected services or businesses, especially when that is done to the detriment of the locale.

Plastic banners with naff designs obliterating generations-old buildings that are publicly, not privately, funded is not good and street clutter in general is ugly.

As for 1st world problems - the 2000s rang and want their cliche back. The fact you have access to a computer or smartphone, can communicate effectively in English (using correct punctuation, suggesting a good education) points to privilege.

[EDguy89]

"Obliterating generations-old buildings"....hmmm..last time I checked, that word is useful in situations where something has been completely destroyed.

You sure you haven't confused this school with buildings in the Ukraine? Cause THAT would constitute the word "obliterate".

But you're right, this is a travesty. The head teacher should be strung up, tarred and feathered. Lawlessness of this level should never be tolerated and I expect the Crown Court to review this matter! We should not stand by while innocent flower beds, railings, and architecture, ALL PUBLICLY FUNDED MIND YOU, suffer this literal holocaust. The fact that no one other than Nigello sees the crimes against humanity here speaks to just how blinded East Dulwich has become by their pampered lifestyles. A quote comes to mind: "The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing". First, after school activities, then what? School fairs? CAR BOOT SALES?

HAVE YOU ALL NO SHAME?!

[Nigello]

Shows promise but needs work. Perhaps there is an afterschool comedy club that could help...?