Feedback and update on SPACE Southwark.

[parentsteeringgroup]

Many local parents have asked for an update on the SPACE Southwark Campaign following the recent announcements regarding the approval of The Charter School Educational Trust to deliver the new secondary school for East Dulwich and the withdrawal of The Harris Federation from the site and their decision not to proceed with a new primary school for Nunhead. Many of those involved in the neutral SPACE petition had also been supporters of the Haberdashers' Aske's Federation bid and had worked for many months to ensure that whichever provider was successful, they would not be compromised in terms of space by a primary school on the site.

Representatives of the parent steering group that had supported the Haberdashers' Aske's Federation bid recently met with the The Charter School Educational Trust and several also attended the recent Friends of Charter Meeting held at Darrell Road Community Centre in April. On both occasions members of the parent steering group shared their views on the need for a full consultation process that will ensure the East Dulwich community can comment on key areas such as admissions, the vision for the school, local partnerships and practical questions about temporary accommodation and site issues.

It wishes all the staff and the volunteer parents involved in the delivery of the consultation and the new school every success.

After a delay of two months the Department for Education (DfE) only recently gave feedback on the Haberdashers' Aske's bid to the parent steering group Chair. The DfE made it extremely clear that the Haberdashers' bid had been a very strong one, the campaign was commended during the original interview for its passion and the Chair was told by the DfE assessment team that "your campaign could not have done more."

They also confirmed to our Chair that the Habs' bid had also "crossed the threshold" for approval by some margin and there was very little to choose between the two. Because of this and the unique set of local circumstances in East Dulwich, recommendations were made by officials and then sent to the Minister for Free Schools Lord Nash. He personally made the final decision between the two.

The steering group has thanked Habs for being exemplary throughout the whole process and gracious in their response to the outcome.The two bids had different narratives and responses to the need for school places in East Dulwich. The excellent consultation that Habs and the steering group undertook over the many months of campaigning helped to inform many local parents about the various hotspots of need and demand in East Dulwich.

The steering group has no further points to make other than to state what actually happened and to reassure all our registered parents and the wider community that the Haberdashers' Aske's bid had been worth supporting.

Many of the parents involved would like to continue campaigning to ensure that the Dulwich Hospital site is used only for health, education and community use under the neutral banner of SPACE Southwark. We will also campaign more broadly for additional school places where there is a genuine need in Southwark. We wish to use our experience in East Dulwich to support other parent groups that want to work with potential education providers and assist them in understanding and mapping the local need as well as helping to identify possible sites. We plan to hold a meeting to take these new objectives forward and will let parents know more details in due course. We will post as SPACE Southwark going forward.

Once again many thanks to everyone that has supported the school and site campaigns.

[samstopit]

I wonder if the DfE recommendations to Lord Nash could be shared? Did Habs ask what they were when they got their feedback? I don't think 'it was a ministerial decision' is very helpful considering all the work that went into both bids.

[colabottle]

Well done to Haberdashers and to the amazing parent steering group that led the original campaign, and thank you for updating us on the reasons for the decision. It makes complete sense that both bids were strong but concerns me greatly that one minister has been allowed to make the final decision. Whilst the decision has been made and I support Charter going forward, I think it is only fair, for the sake of transparency, to understand how that decision was reached. I think making public the DfE recommendations would be sensible, and at the very least, reassure the public that the decision was made on merit rather than on some ministerial wim, perhaps bound up in personal preference.

Does anyone know anything about Lord Nash and his affiliations?

If the decision between the bids was so close, should Southwark not have been consulted and allowed to make the final decision, given that they know their local area better than anyone? It seems to me that this raises bigger issues around procedure and protocol that lay at the heart of a fair free school system.

[confusedbyitall]

I believe there is a link between Lord Nash and Simon (surname has left me) who ran the Charter bid.....

Its a business link but could also be a personal one - internet only divulges so much!

I think its weird that the decision with its massive repercussions went to one "independent" person, who knew nothing of the area, steering committee campaign etc

[colabottle]

Surely Lord Nash would have to declare any interests?

[ladybird01]

Can someone enlighten me as I am not really into secondary schools yet. Does this mean that they will open another private secondary leaving the working class parents and their kids in already oversubscribed community secondary schools?

[samstopit]

No it will be a new state school on the Dulwich Hospital site.

[bawdy-nan]

Lord Nash is an Academy "pioneer" via his "Future" organisation (an interesting googleable track record) and also a massive Tory donor. He was appointed to his current position in Jan 2013. He's also a former chair of the Venture Capitalist Association and set up a private equity firm "Sovereign" and is the former chair of a large NHS private contractor.

One might draw from that that he's keen on private business and education.

Simon Tucker who led the Charter bid is a former Chief Exec of the Young Foundation and pioneer of "Studio Schools" (strong links with "employers" and employment led approach to education and highly praised by Lord Nash). His list of publications and interests demonstrates a strong interest in the role of private finance and "venture" capital in social contexts, especially social entrepreneurship. He's on the governing body of NHS West London.

The new Charter has appointed a head with a strong background in the private business sector and one of its flagship offers is a "strong partnership" with local NHS employers.

If the two bids were of equal quality it isn't surprising that Lord Nash might pick the offer and team closer to his way of thinking. I don't think there's anything "fishy" at all. Perhaps just a preference for a particular "style" and attitude.

Whatever the precise reasons for Nash's decision. There's no doubt that both bids were strongly supported and that it,s fantastically good news that a new school will be up and running soon.

[dontpanic]

Fully support Charter now it's to become a reality, looking forward to contributing to consultations.

I think the process that has been gone through in this case has big implications for the way new schools are initiated going forward. Now we know that the Tories will continue the free school process it will be interesting to see how hey tighten up and refine the process based on situations like this.

As well as Lord Nash making the decision- - by definition not having been as informed on the locality or individual applications - I also think that the DfE have made an arbitrary decision that this was a 'zero sum game' and that they must choose one or other of the bids at the application stage. As far as I know this isn't written into the free school application process? I'd be interested to know if it was - or will be in the future.

[colabottle]

But surely if he has former business associations with Simon Tucker this potentially prejudices his decision, and he should declare this. I'm no lawyer but it seems to me that there could be good grounds for a judicial review here, depending on what the recommendations were. More reason for those to be disclosed I would have thought. Any lawyers out there?

[tadpole39]

Let it go, (sings) haven't we wrung enough mileage out of this already? It's decided, it's done, let's move on.

[colabottle]

It's not a question of changing the decision, as I said, that's been made and I support Charter going forward. What is important is to understand how the decision was reached, and to ensure that a fair procedure was adhered to and continues to be followed, for all, including those applications for free schools that follow. It's not all about East Dulwich Charter but looking at the wider picture of due process.

[littlek1cker]

Dear parentsteeringgroup, confusedbyitall, and bawdy-nan,

I feel I need to respond to the implication that the decision to approve the free school proposal from the Charter rather than the one from Haberdashers was made on grounds other than the merits of the two bids.

It is not accurate to suggest, as parentsteeringgroup does, that officials within DfE referred the decision to Lord Nash because of ?the unique set of local circumstances in East Dulwich?. In fact, every decision to approve or not to approve a free school proposal is taken by the relevant Minister after receiving advice from his officials. Both bidders understood this process before we submitted our proposals (Habs have previously been through this process several times).

Bawdy-nan: For the record, I am not aware of having any business or personal links to Lord Nash. Indeed, I have never even met him. If you are going to make accusations like this, the responsible thing to do is to be specific about the links you think I have to Lord Nash so that others can examine them.

Both Bawdy-nan and confusedbyitall: You are blowing out of all proportion my role in the Charter bid. I am only one of several local parents and current governors and staff of The Charter School who are working extremely hard to open a new school for our community.

Confusedbyitall: I am bemused that you think our team would have been ?closer to his [Lord Nash?s] way of thinking? on such tenuous links between his and my interests. By the way, I would not describe myself as having ?a strong interest in the role of private finance? in social contexts? since this might be misinterpreted. I do not believe that venture capital has any legitimate role in financing the delivery of public services. If you read my publications this should be very clear.

The feedback we received from the DfE was that the Charter bid was one of the strongest in the current wave. I?m sure that Haberdashers also put in a credible bid. At the end of the day, the DfE preferred ours. Not because of any kind of conspiracy or because we were matey with the right ministers, but, I trust, because they judged ours the better bid.

The Charter School Educational Trust will shortly be starting its public consultation on the new school. I would encourage everyone to contribute constructively to this consultation rather than raking over what has happened to date. That way, we can build a school for this community of which we can all be proud.

Simon Tucker

[bawdy-nan]

Hello Simon

I haven't made any accusations at all and I'm very sorry indeed if it reads like that.

I'm thrilled that there will be a new school and congratulate the team on delivering a successful bid.

I was responding to a previous poster who seemed to be making those implications. I wanted to find out more so looked you both up.

I saw that you have a powerful interest in social entrepreneurship and a strong track record of interest in allying private finance with social projects and that you have done lots of work in the field of developing models for venture capital for social ends.

From the published information about Lord Nash it is also clear that he shares similar ideals.

The minister is obviously impressed by your previous work with studio schools (he's on record as saying so). That is in no way at all to suggest that you've somehow cooked a deal with him. I don't think anything I've said about either of you is incorrect is it? (Although some of the information available online is slightly out of date).

I was suggesting that, all things being equal, and both bids being strong, which is what the feedback from Det of Ed suggested, that it isn't surprising that the minister might choose the bid that was more closely aligned with his way of thinking - strong links to local employers, a head teacher with recent experience in the private sector etc.

I don't have any connections with the other bid, other than that I supported it as a local parent.

I wish you every success with the school.

[littlek1cker]

Bawdy-nan,

Apologies, I accidentally switched your name and confusedbyitall's names around in my previous post. I accept that you didn't make any accusations.

Thanks for the good wishes.

Simon