Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Is there a specific petition that can be organised to show that the community is 100% behind the priorities set up by the steering committee? My fear is that they will simply say that primary school's support came first and shouldn't be scupperred by a later proposal. That line of argument is nonsense for various reasons but a very strong community backing (above and beyond those whose children will be attending the first few forms of either Charter or Habs) would really drive home the point that we are speaking with one voice against this nonsense strategy.
Hopefully! Have you informally reached out to her to understand her position? Given how quickly things appear to be moving on the Harris side, I don't think it makes sense to wait very long before understanding how these changes impact the overall situation.

Hi all,

Gove's letter does sound worrying, I hope that Nicky Morgan actually takes into consideration what is needed in the area and what local residents and the local council want. There was a need for late bulge classes in 2009 in East Dulwich and that cohort will be applying for secondary entry in 2016. The Cabinet report that produces a picture of what is predicted for primary and secondary school place demands in Southward over the next few years, predicts that increased primary demand will be shifting northwards in the Borough and that the South of the Borough is where there will be increased demand for Secondary places from 2016, and that this demand will shift northwards in the Borough over the next few years.

Renata

I'm not sure his letter clearly written by his officials is worrying.

He says primary school crisis is more pressing than secondary school places in Southwark - this is as per Southwark Council reports. Exactly the same reports used by officers representing Labour led Southwark Council to refute for some considerable time the need for a new East Dulwich secondary school. It was only when we have over 500 families supporting our campaign that the council changed its mind. So it's taking DfE officials time to catch-up and they will when the secondary free school application/s are submitted after the summer holidays.


Until then the only approved free school awaiting a site in the area to be identified is the Harris Nunhead. So factually his letter is spot on.

So what alternative site can be found for the Harris Nunhead free primary schools. Harris want to build it permanently on the Harris Girls East Dulwich Academy site. Southwark as the planning authority can indicate it would support this and we then have the soltution. Over to the council leader Peter John to organise this. Gove or his replacement can't make this happen.

James, how can you expect Peter John to say he will grant planning permission for a scheme without having seen any indicative plans? If there are plans, please let us know.


If Harris are serious about building on the Girls site, why don?t they as a minimum get plans to show its feasible? They will need to convince not only Southwark but also the mayor as it would require building on the equivalent of protected land.


Gove?s letter is worrying as it suggests that the allocation of limited land resources should be solely on a first come first serve basis. The technicalities of application submission timing should not override the fact that a secondary school (without site sharing) is needed in this part of Southwark.


There is no need for another primary school in East Dulwich. Anyone who can read the reports will see that with the opening of the Harris ED and Judith Kerr, the Dulwich area actually has a 2-2.5 form entry SURPLUS by 2016 (see page 3).


http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&frm=1&source=web&cd=1&ved=0CCAQFjAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.southwark.gov.uk%2Fdownload%2Fdownloads%2Fid%2F10228%2Fcdi4_school_places_strategy_update_cabinet_report_18_march_2014&ei=Ia3GU_zsNs2myASlz4KIDg&usg=AFQjCNHE7VMfdZxd6sYOYyJHduqUgObO2g&sig2=Zuc-ZEysh4_v3sy8wHNBrQ


If the Harris Primary were to open in Nunhead, based on current forecasts, there would be a SURPLUS of between 0.5 to 1.5 entries by 2016 as Ivydale is also expanding. Without a Harris Nunhead, the shortfall would be between -.5 and -1.5 form entries.


Therefore, even if one were to use the logic that children in Nunhead should travel to ED for primary school (which is questionable), there already will be a large enough surplus of places in ED to absorb potential overspill from Nunhead by 2016 without the creation of an additional primary school in ED.


Therefore, there is absolutely no need or justification for opening up a Harris Nunhead in East Dulwich and any steps to do so would represent a terrible misallocation of land resources and taxpayer money. You, Harris, and the DfE, having read the report from Southwark and having been briefed by local MPs and the parents group should be able to recognize this and acknowledge this without hesitation or qualifications.

Hi LondonMix,

The Dulwich Hospital site NHS options appraisal will conclude around March/April next year by my estimates. Woefully slow but after 21+ yeasrs and counting something might happen this time.

The secondary free school applications from both Charter and Habs will be submitted this October and decide Jan/feb.


At that point the EFA will know which schools are approved locally and the land available. I would be amazed if the EFA proposed at that point when it had approved free schools to find locations for if it placed a 420 pupil primary school over am 1150 pupil secondary school.


The same reports you're quoting also suggest we have surplus of secondary school places and that the council have asked and the schools have expressed an interest in expanding - namely Charter School, Harris Girls and Boys academies.

Clearly the Harris expansion would be blocked by a new primary school being added to the site.

Nearly half of the 248 families who signed up to support new Harris Primary school came from the eastern edges and beyond of SE22 - the Peckham Rye/Nunhead area. This wasnt what I expected but Harris have respodned with the EFA to this.


You;ve stated that with Ivydale supersizing and Harris Nunhead a surplus of 1/2 -> 1.5 FE but without Harris Nunhead a shortfall of 1/2 -> 1.5FE.

Hello all,

many thanks to so many of you for coming along to our meeting last week. For both those who couldn't make it, and those who may not have had a chance to fill in a feedback form yet, we thought it would be useful to post the link to the online form: http://www.haaf.org.uk/New-East-Dulwich-Secondary-School-1


This is your chance to tell Haberdashers' how you think the school should work. Many of you have particular views on admissions, and there is scope to share your views on that as well as other issues, such as how the school could work with the community, and what facilities it should have. On the admissions point, Haberdashers' would be interested to know, for example, whether you live in what you consider to be a secondary schools black hole, and whether you would support the idea of "nodal points". Those who came to the meeting may have picked up on the mention of nodal points, but for those who aren't aware, a nodal point is a point outside of the school site from which distance can be measured and admissions determined. i.e., a way to open catchment up in black holes.


Haberdashers are currently in the process of evaluating all the data, and if you have time to go online and fill in a form before the summer holidays kick in, then it all helps towards informing their application when it goes into the Department for Education after the star of the new academic year. We know everyone is busy with the end of term and preparing for summer holidays, but if you do want to have a say on this, then now is your chance. It's also an opportunity to register your support for Haberdashers, if you wish to.


Many thanks - and do post if you have any questions. You can find us on Facebook and Twitter too: https://www.facebook.com/NewSchDulwich?ref=ts&fref=ts

@NewSchDulwich

James Barber Wrote:

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


>

> You;ve stated that with Ivydale supersizing and

> Harris Nunhead a surplus of 1/2 -> 1.5 FE but

> without Harris Nunhead a shortfall of 1/2 ->

> 1.5FE.



James, I clearly stated that without a Harris Nunhead in Nunhead the projected shortfall for that area would be between 0.5 to 1.5 places. However, given there is already a surplus of places in ED of 2 to 2.5 entries by 2016, developing another primary school in East Dulwich to meet the Nunhead potential shortfall makes no sense. There are already more than enough surplus places in ED with the various expansions and new schools to meet projected shortfall in Nunhead without the creation of another new primary school ED. Therefore, locating a new Harris Nunhead in East Dulwich makes no sense and is a waste of tax payers money and a waste of limitted land resources.


Do you disagree with any of that?


As an aside, it is disingenuous for you to suggest the report says there is no secondary shortage. Borough wide in Southwark, the report shows a shortage across the borough from 2016 which becomes very acute by 2018. The report also acknowledges that when you look at local communities vs. the borough as a whole this area needs a secondary to meet more localised demand more quickly.

Yes, LondonMix I disagree with that.

The one thing we know is Southwark forecasts keep being wrong and under estimating demand. Equally the EFA have all these figures yet approved the Belham free school post approving the Harris Nunhead. So the EFA clearly agree we need the Harris Nunhead to meet demand.

The worst that will happen is that we will need less bulging of schools - bulging is never an ideal solution.

James you disagree that there is enough surplus places in ED to meet a shortfall in Nunhead without creating a new school in East Dulwich?


The projections show no need for bulging in this part of the borough based on the current expansions and new schools. The shortfall from 2016 is in the north of the borough.

Morning everyone


The summary slides from the Haberdashers? consultation evening on 10th July are attached here. Thanks for your patience in waiting for these. Hopefully they are a useful reminder for those of you who were there and give an idea of what was discussed for those who couldn?t make it.


The feedback forms so far are telling us that most of you are worried about the admissions policy and the fact that the hospital site (where we hope the school will be located ? the only site that?s big enough locally) is not where we really need the school to be, since most of the families who need a new co-ed secondary school live to the East of Lordship Lane. We know that there are secondary school ?black holes? (many of the parent steering group members live in one of these) and many of you are keen to make sure that the proposed new school allows those families to be in catchment.


So that the steering group can support Habs to resolve the issues around catchment please can as many of you as possible fill out the feedback form here:


http://www.haaf.org.uk/New-East-Dulwich-Secondary-School-1


It doesn?t matter how many times you fill out the feedback form ? Habs will pick out any duplicate names and group the feedback under areas of concern.


Under the admissions section can we ask you to consider:


? Do you live in an admissions ?black hole? for a co-ed secondary school? If so where is it? Where are the other parts of ED which are not served by a local co-ed secondary?


? Do you support the idea of a nodal point that would allow distance to be measured (for admissions purposes) from a location other than the school?


If you have any questions or concerns please post them here, or you can email Haberdashers directly at [email protected]


Thanks again, we appreciate your support and input.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • But do you not understand how tough farming is, especially post-Brexit when some of the subsidies were lost and costs have increased massively yet the prices farmers can charge has not? On the BBC News tonight they said pig farming costs had gone up 54% since 2019, cow farming costs up 44% and cereal costs up 43%. The NFU said that the margins are on average 0.5% return on capital. Land and buildings are assets that don't make money until you sell them...it's what you do with them that makes money and farms are struggling to make money and so many farms are generational family businesses so never realise the assets (one farmers on the news said his farm had been in the family since 1822) but will have to to pay tax for continuing the family business. On another news item tonight there was a short piece saying the government has said that 50,000 more pensioners will be forced into relative poverty (60% of the average income) due to the Winter Fuel Allowance removal which will rise to 100,000 more by 2027. James Murray from the Treasury was rolled out on Newsnight to try and defend that and couldn't. You can't give doctors 20%+ and push more pensioners into poverty as a result.  The problem for Labour is the court of public opinion will judge them and right now the jury is out after a series of own-goals, really poor communication and ill-thought-out idealogical policies. And don't ever annoy the farmers.....;-)  
    • That % of “affected” doesn’t mean they are all in deep trouble.  It means this will touch on them in some small way mostly - apart from the biggest farms  it’s like high rate tax earners taking to the street when Osborne dragged child/benefit claimants into self assessment.  A mild pain  the more I read, the more obviously confected it is. Still - just as with farage and his banking “woes”, a social media campaign is no barrier to the gullible  what percentage of farms affected by Brexit and to what degree compared go IHT?  Or does that not matter? Thats different money is it? 
    • Farmers groups say 35% of farms will be affected while the Treasury reckons its 27% - neither figure is a tiny portion. The problem is farming is often asset rich but cash poor meaning that those who inherit farms and have to pay the tax will likely need to sell land to pay for it and could well further impact the cash poor nature and productivity of that farm. I would have thought those who align on the left would be welcoming farmers protesting on the streets against a government making their lives more difficult. Good on them. Makes a change from tube and rail strikes at least! I was shocked to read that the average weekly earnings for agricultural workers was significantly lower than the national average.  Clearly Labour doesn't consider these working people.
    • A tax change that affects a tiny portion of farmers livelihoods and income - mass protest and wild accusations on forums like this    Brexit which impacted farmers income and uk food security far far far more ? Crickets. Absolutely nothing. “Price worth paying mate “   Don’t  be fooled about what this is about - it’s isn’t IHT.  
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...