Consultation for the Charter School East Dulwich

[bonaome]

bornagain Wrote:

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

> hoonaloona Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

>

> > So don't tell me that all the people who

> > campaigned like crazy for the Charter 2 nodal

> > point to remain in Jarvis Road as that position

> > better serves Camberwell/Peckham actually

> already

> > have a viable co-ed, non-faith, non-lottery

> school

> > already on their doorstep??? What was all the

> fuss

> > about then?

>

> I suspect that the fuss has been created by the

> fact that those supporting Charter 2 do not want

> to send their children to Harris Peckham.

And those who wouldn't, on distance, get their kids into Harris Peckham. We're up by the police station. I can't find distance offered data for Harris Peckham, but the Southwark booklet for admissions for this year says it is oversubscribed and the Righmove school checker thing (again, don't know where they get their data from) says where we are Harris Peckham is 'not likely'.

[bawdy-nan]

The mission and vision statement makes absolutely no mention whatsoever of the intended provision for children with SEN - whether statemented / EHC or otherwise and yet finds time to focus very specifically on the provision for those with talents for languages and music and who learn fast. According to government data 18% of children have some form of SEN and not to mention what provision might be offered or even a statement about accessibility is very telling.

There is indeed a mention of:

"Those pupils whose abilities develop at a later stage will also be given appropriate attention. If for any

reason a pupil arrives at our school without essential literacy or numeracy skills, we will

support them with an entry-year nurture group, rapidly bringing those pupils to the standard

expected to access the rest of the curriculum. Tailored support will also be available for

students whose first language is not English. "

But children with SEN are NOT automatically of lower ability, without literacy or numeracy skills. Children with SEN don't automatically get a place at a school (ie priority above the rest of the applicants) unless they have an EHC - hardly any children with SEN have an EHC.

Either they don't know this and don't understand their statutory (and moral) obligations around SEN or they do know this and are deliberately leaving out any kind of supportive mention of SEN on purpose. You can draw your own conclusions about why this might be.

You might read the vision statement and conclude: this school really wants to cater for the bright and the talented, AND this school will make an effort with children who enter the school at a lower level of literacy and numeracy or with English as a second language.

You might read the vision statement and observe that the school is simply not interested in the nearly 20% of children with SEN and you might conclude that that's the message they want you to take - that they're not a school especially "well equipped" to "deal" with children with SEN (irrespective of their talents, academic brilliance or otherwise).

That the school has made the decision to have different admissions criteria to its sister school Charter around special social and medical need - lowering this priority to put it below siblings could also be read as an indication of attitude towards children with additional needs.

It is thoroughgoingly depressing either way: whether it is an omission because of thoughtlessness and lack of understanding / competence around communication or if its is deliberate and meant to be off-putting.

> I agree with all you say except this bit about

> Charter setting out to attract more academically

> gifted kids. SEN/EHCplan provision requirements

> (where the school is named) always has precedence

> over oversubscription criteria. The rest is the

> great unwashed based on living nearest the

> school.

>

> I don't see how that would lead to the school

> targeting the more academically gifted.

[bawdy-nan]

There are lots of children who are identified as having SEN (17.9% of children) but who do not have an EHC (only 2.8% of children have statements / EHC plans). They are on "school action" or "school action plus". This means that they have been identified as needing extra and targeted support in order to access the curriculum. (This does not mean that they are children who are necessarily lower achievers, of lower potential or lacking numeracy or literacy skills). According to government statistics around 18% of children have SEN. Only children with an EHC will be able to "name" a school on their plan all the others go via the standard admissions process.

Only children with an EHC are "guaranteed" provision for their needs in a school setting. So the attitude of a school towards SEN is extremely important.

Does that answer your (perfectly reasonable!) question?

The social or medical need criteria issue is, in my opinion, all about attitude because, in reality, putting it below siblings is only about an assertion of attitude. (ie it probably won't make much difference at all to children where this is used)

Ask away if not...

bonaome Wrote:

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

> intexasatthe moment Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > bonaome - I think that giving siblings

> priority

> > over those with special medical and social

> needs

> > it sends the wrong message .

>

> Surely either a child has a SEN/EHC plan, in which

> case they get priority, or they do not have an EHC

> plan and they are the same as everyone else.

> Right? Wrong?

>

> What are the special medical and social needs that

> would be missed because they are not picked up in

> the EHC assessment?

>

> Genuine question - not trying to wind anyone up.

[LondonMix]

Exactly-- I was just going to respond the same. Also, while Harris Peckham is undersubscribed, the other two Harris schools are oversubscribed (though not as significantly as the existing Charter).

bornagain Wrote:

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

> bonaome Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

>

> > Have I missed a co-ed, non-faith, non-lottery

> > school, within a mile of Charter2?

> >

>

> Yes, Harris Peckham and it is under-subsribed.

[LondonMix]

It was undersubscribed this year based on information posted by Renata on the secondary school thread.

bonaome Wrote:

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

> bornagain Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > bonaome Wrote:

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> > -----

> >

> > > Have I missed a co-ed, non-faith, non-lottery

> > > school, within a mile of Charter2?

> > >

> >

> > Yes, Harris Peckham and it is under-subsribed.

>

> It's oversubscribed according to

> this booklet on secondary admissions from

> Southwark. It's also more than a mile from Charter

> 2. And moreover, it looks like we would be very

> unlikely to get her in there based on a distance

> offer.

[LondonMix]

Harris are shocking. A shortage of places in the South of the borough will coincide with the opening of the school in 2016. The new places will ensure that no shortage develops in this area.

The Federation clearly feels threatened but I can't believe they are actually challenging the opening and threatening legal action.

[intexasatthe moment]

Regarding the question of whether The Academy@Peckham is oversubscribed or not I would say that there is probably some discrepancy between the number of applications received ( as quoted on Southwark's site ) and the number of applicants who take up places .

The executive principal of the Peckham Academy ,writing in response to The Charter 2 consultation on 30 June says

"Harris Academy Peckham is not oversubscribed for 2015 and demand is not forecast to increase significantly in 2016 or 2017 " http://www.charter.southwark.sch.uk/_files/users/50/EB784C4411EE6173F6C0BDB154953046.pdf page 53

It may be worth noting that The Academy@Peckham reduced it's intake a couple of years ago and that despite opening a ( one of 2 feeder ) primary school on it's premises has a very large site .

[intexasatthe moment]

On a different note my understanding of the Harris banding system is that it reflects the national ability range ,not that of the cohort applying in any one year or that of the local area .

Which if correct would mean that if unable to obtain an intake matching the national ability profile from near the school they would take pupils from a wide geographical area .

So the concerns they express in the report http://www.charter.southwark.sch.uk/_files/users/50/EB784C4411EE6173F6C0BDB154953046.pdf page 50 about Charter 2's vision " being aimed at affluent children " with the result "that we ( Harris ED ) will see the percentage of children with challenging backgrounds and social issues increase " shouldn't worry them . Should it ?

Though the concept that children from financially deprived backgrounds equates to children with challenging backgrounds and social issues might worry us .

(I'm sure ,but of course could be wrong ,that the ED Harris boys school had this info re the type of banding used on it's website ,but I can't find any evidence of that now .)

[LondonMix]

Well James Barber's comments are more clear. I would guess he meant that planning is going to be more difficult as the Harris Federation is not happy

[LondonMix]

Well James Barber's comments are more clear. I would guess he meant that planning is going to be more difficult as the Harris Federation is not happy and so they will interfere and use their political connections to block the school's planning application.

Southwark's figures suggest the shortage will begin from 2016 in the south of the borough. On what basis is Harris challenging Southwark?

Harris cannot force a school to adopt a lottery particularly when parents have shown no support for it.

I am not opposed to lotteries but this feels like a rather naked attempt to ensure they continue to get affluent students in their schools even if parents don't want to send them to the Harris federation.

The language Harris use is also very threatening and intimidating both to Charter as well as to our elected officials.

This entire thing is so unseemly. I hope that Charter don't let themselves be bullied and that our elected officials do not allow themselves to be threatened.

[JDR]

My only suggestion is that if Harris start throwing their weight around that people start barraging the minister for education and local MP's with letters. Despite local differences, now admissions have been set we can all pull in the same direction and get a great local school open ASAP! I won't be applying for my year 5 child which is disappointing as we will likely end up at a single sex school which as a family of three girls I didn't want. However, my daughter would benefit from older children ahead of her. I will let my end of year three child choose closer to the time

[intexasatthe moment]

I don't think it's "if" ;the tone of correspondence from Harris shows that they ARE throwing their weight around .

Additionally I can see no other reason behind their refusal to meet and discuss with Charter 2 until September than a deliberate attempt to delay the project making it impossible for Charter 2 to meet important deadlines .

FWIW given that Harris have mentioned an admissions policy based on zones I don't think they'll be pushing for a lottery .And personally I think zones have much to recommend them ,not least that they prevent an ever decreasing catchment area as popularity grows . But I do think they'll hold out for a reduced admissions number .

While I think it's wrong that the current status of education with competing schools and differing admissions procedures allows politics and capitalism to give Harris so much power and I dislike their methods ,they do have a point .

We need to hear from the steering group/Charter/local councillors what their take on Harris's threats is and how it can be dealt with in a constructive way .

Writing to MPs and Sec.of State seems a good option .

[bonaome]

@bawdyNan - thanks for clarification on SEN/EHC.

[intexasatthe moment]

not having a dig but just want to emphasise that according to Harris vice principal Academy@Peckham not oversubscribed for 2015 nor expected to be for 2016 or 2017 .

[Curmudgeon]

bawdy-nan Wrote:

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

> There are lots of children who are identified as

> having SEN (17.9% of children) but who do not have

> an EHC (only 2.8% of children have statements /

> EHC plans). They are on "school action" or "school

> action plus". This means that they have been

> identified as needing extra and targeted support

> in order to access the curriculum. (This does not

> mean that they are children who are necessarily

> lower achievers, of lower potential or lacking

> numeracy or literacy skills). According to

> government statistics around 18% of children have

> SEN. Only children with an EHC will be able to

> "name" a school on their plan all the others go

> via the standard admissions process.

>

> Only children with an EHC are "guaranteed"

> provision for their needs in a school setting. So

> the attitude of a school towards SEN is extremely

> important.

> Does that answer your (perfectly reasonable!)

> question?

>

> The social or medical need criteria issue is, in

> my opinion, all about attitude because, in

> reality, putting it below siblings is only about

> an assertion of attitude. (ie it probably won't

> make much difference at all to children where this

> is used)

>

> Ask away if not...

>

As a point of information my understanding, and do correct me if I'm wrong, is that Children with school action and school action plus (both of which have been phased out this year) were never able to name a school. Only children with statements could do so which has now been replaced by EHC so no difference there then

[LondonMix]

You can only have zones if the allocation within them are lotteries. If you simply had two zones both based on distance (each zone taking 90 students as Harris suggests) would be that the first zone would have students closest to the school get in. then the second zone would have students closest to the school get in . The absurd situation that would result is those on the outer edge of the first zone would possibly not get in while this right behind them at the start of the new zone would. You'd have a band between the two zones where children where least likely to attend.

Most schools with zones therefore allocate places by lottery within the zones. In fact I'd be interested to see an example of an admissions policy that has zones where both are done on distance. If you can find one please let me know.

intexasatthe moment Wrote:

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

> I don't think it's "if" ;the tone of

> correspondence from Harris shows that they ARE

> throwing their weight around .

>

> Additionally I can see no other reason behind

> their refusal to meet and discuss with Charter 2

> until September than a deliberate attempt to delay

> the project making it impossible for Charter 2 to

> meet important deadlines .

>

> FWIW given that Harris have mentioned an

> admissions policy based on zones I don't think

> they'll be pushing for a lottery .And personally I

> think zones have much to recommend them ,not least

> that they prevent an ever decreasing catchment

> area as popularity grows . But I do think they'll

> hold out for a reduced admissions number .

>

> While I think it's wrong that the current status

> of education with competing schools and differing

> admissions procedures allows politics and

> capitalism to give Harris so much power and I

> dislike their methods ,they do have a point .

>

> We need to hear from the steering

> group/Charter/local councillors what their take on

> Harris's threats is and how it can be dealt with

> in a constructive way .

>

> Writing to MPs and Sec.of State seems a good

> option .

[hpsaucey]

Curmudgeon Wrote:

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

> bawdy-nan Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > There are lots of children who are identified

> as

> > having SEN (17.9% of children) but who do not

> have

> > an EHC (only 2.8% of children have statements /

> > EHC plans). They are on "school action" or

> "school

> > action plus". This means that they have been

> > identified as needing extra and targeted

> support

> > in order to access the curriculum. (This does

> not

> > mean that they are children who are necessarily

> > lower achievers, of lower potential or lacking

> > numeracy or literacy skills). According to

> > government statistics around 18% of children

> have

> > SEN. Only children with an EHC will be able to

> > "name" a school on their plan all the others go

> > via the standard admissions process.

> >

> > Only children with an EHC are "guaranteed"

> > provision for their needs in a school setting.

> So

> > the attitude of a school towards SEN is

> extremely

> > important.

> > Does that answer your (perfectly reasonable!)

> > question?

> >

> > The social or medical need criteria issue is,

> in

> > my opinion, all about attitude because, in

> > reality, putting it below siblings is only

> about

> > an assertion of attitude. (ie it probably won't

> > make much difference at all to children where

> this

> > is used)

> >

> > Ask away if not...

> >

>

> As a point of information my understanding, and do

> correct me if I'm wrong, is that Children with

> school action and school action plus (both of

> which have been phased out this year) were never

> able to name a school. Only children with

> statements could do so which has now been replaced

> by EHC so no difference there then

Which is why, as bawdynan says their overall attitude to sen is so crucial. How exactly are the school going to cater for those with sen but no ehc?

Visit a number of secondary schools, ask the question, and you will be amazed by the wide range of responses. Some schools, frankly, appear to pay lip service.others, really thought through and suppoetive approaches.

[intexasatthe moment]

Londonmix - yes see exactly what you are saying about having to have lottery if have zones .I can be a bit dense sometimes !

[bawdy-nan]

That's right and that's what I meant: EHC replaces the statement and always SA and SAplus unable to name a school. Sorry if that wasn't clear. My point is that there are lots of children with SEN and that there are lots who can't name a school.

Curmudgeon Wrote:

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

> bawdy-nan Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > There are lots of children who are identified

> as

> > having SEN (17.9% of children) but who do not

> have

> > an EHC (only 2.8% of children have statements /

> > EHC plans). They are on "school action" or

> "school

> > action plus". This means that they have been

> > identified as needing extra and targeted

> support

> > in order to access the curriculum. (This does

> not

> > mean that they are children who are necessarily

> > lower achievers, of lower potential or lacking

> > numeracy or literacy skills). According to

> > government statistics around 18% of children

> have

> > SEN. Only children with an EHC will be able to

> > "name" a school on their plan all the others go

> > via the standard admissions process.

> >

> > Only children with an EHC are "guaranteed"

> > provision for their needs in a school setting.

> So

> > the attitude of a school towards SEN is

> extremely

> > important.

> > Does that answer your (perfectly reasonable!)

> > question?

> >

> > The social or medical need criteria issue is,

> in

> > my opinion, all about attitude because, in

> > reality, putting it below siblings is only

> about

> > an assertion of attitude. (ie it probably won't

> > make much difference at all to children where

> this

> > is used)

> >

> > Ask away if not...

> >

>

> As a point of information my understanding, and do

> correct me if I'm wrong, is that Children with

> school action and school action plus (both of

> which have been phased out this year) were never

> able to name a school. Only children with

> statements could do so which has now been replaced

> by EHC so no difference there then

[landsberger]

That's actually 229 applications whether preference 1 to 6. Believe me, it is undersubscribed, and underfilled, in part because of sheer snobbery.

> > > Have I missed a co-ed, non-faith, non-lottery

> > > school, within a mile of Charter2?

> > Yes, Harris Peckham and it is under-subsribed.

> It's oversubscribed according to

> this booklet on secondary admissions from

> Southwark. It's also more than a mile from Charter

> 2. And moreover, it looks like we would be very

> unlikely to get her in there based on a distance

> offer.

1.9 miles, so that's fairly likely

[bawdy-nan]

Curmudgeon

> As a point of information my understanding, and do

> correct me if I'm wrong, is that Children with

> school action and school action plus (both of

> which have been phased out this year) were never

> able to name a school. Only children with

> statements could do so which has now been replaced

> by EHC so no difference there then

As you'll be aware School Action and School Action Plus as categories have been abolished but the children covered by those categories are / will now be covered by the category of "SEN support". The children still have SEN and the schools still have an obligation to support them AND to publish clear information about how they will do that AND to consult with parents and young people.

Ultimately the new Charter will HAVE to do all of this so they MUST already have been addressing their approach and policies. Which makes it feel odd and telling that NOTHING about this is included in any of the mission and consultation documents.

The new SEN Statutory Guidance (Jan 2015) is very clear on this:

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/398815/SEND_Code_of_Practice_January_2015.pdf

I've extracted some key sections below (apologies for long post). I'd really welcome an update to the mission documents that included a clear statement on SEN. The school is a welcome addition to the community but should also be clear that it aims to meet the needs of the community (all of them, including the likely 18% with SEN).

"Schools have a notional SEN budget and many schools will commission services (such as speech and language therapy, pastoral care and counselling services) to support pupils. Schools must work with the local authority in developing the Local Offer, which could include school-commissioned services. The school must set out its SEN policy and information on its approach to supporting children and young people with SEN. The school?s governing body must

ensure that arrangements are in place in schools to support pupils at school with medical conditions and should ensure that school leaders consult health and social care professionals, pupils and parents to make sure that the needs of children with medical conditions are effectively supported."

And:

Mainstream schools have duties to use

best endeavours to make the provision

required to meet the SEN of children and

young people. All schools must publish

details of what SEN provision is

available through the information report

and co-operate with the local authority in

drawing up and reviewing the Local

Offer.

Schools also have duties to make

reasonable adjustments for disabled

children and young people, to support

medical conditions and to inform parents

and young people if SEN provision is

made for them.

PLUS

The information must also include information about the arrangements for the

admission of disabled pupils, the steps taken to prevent disabled pupils from being

treated less favourably than other pupils, the facilities provided to assist access for

disabled pupils and the schools? accessibility plans. The school-specific information

should relate to the schools? arrangements for providing a graduated response to

children?s SEN. It should elaborate on the information provided at a local authority

wide level in the Local Offer.

PLUS

There should be a member of the governing body or a sub-committee with specific

oversight of the school?s arrangements for SEN and disability.

PLUS

The quality of teaching for pupils with SEN, and the progress made by pupils, should

be a core part of the school?s performance management arrangements and its

approach to professional development for all teaching and support staff.

PLUS

All schools have duties under the Equality Act 2010 towards individual disabled

children and young people. They must make reasonable adjustments, including the

provision of auxiliary aids and services for disabled children, to prevent them being

put at a substantial disadvantage. These duties are anticipatory ? they require

thought to be given in advance to what disabled children and young people might

require and what adjustments might need to be made to prevent that disadvantage.

Schools also have wider duties to prevent discrimination, to promote equality of

opportunity and to foster good relations.

PLUS

6.79 The governing bodies of maintained schools and maintained nursery schools and the

proprietors of academy schools must publish information on their websites about the

implementation of the governing body?s or the proprietor?s policy for pupils with SEN.

The information published should be updated annually and any changes to the

information occurring during the year should be updated as soon as possible. The

information required is set out in the Special Educational Needs and Disability

Regulations 2014 and must include information about:

? the kinds of SEN that are provided for

? policies for identifying children and young people with SEN and assessing

their needs, including the name and contact details of the SENCO

(mainstream schools)

? arrangements for consulting parents of children with SEN and involving

them in their child?s education

? arrangements for consulting young people with SEN and involving them in

their education

? arrangements for assessing and reviewing children and young people?s

progress towards outcomes. This should include the opportunities available

to work with parents and young people as part of this assessment and

review

? arrangements for supporting children and young people in moving between

phases of education and in preparing for adulthood. As young people

prepare for adulthood outcomes should reflect their ambitions, which could

include higher education, employment, independent living and participation

in society

? the approach to teaching children and young people with SEN

? how adaptations are made to the curriculum and the learning environment

of children and young people with SEN

107

? the expertise and training of staff to support children and young people with

SEN, including how specialist expertise will be secured

? evaluating the effectiveness of the provision made for children and young

people with SEN

? how children and young people with SEN are enabled to engage in

activities available with children and young people in the school who do not

have SEN

? support for improving emotional and social development. This should

include extra pastoral support arrangements for listening to the views of

children and young people with SEN and measures to prevent bullying

? how the school involves other bodies, including health and social care

bodies, local authority support services and voluntary sector organisations,

in meeting children and young people?s SEN and supporting their families

? arrangements for handling complaints from parents of children with SEN

about the provision made at the school

6.80 The above should include arrangements for supporting children and young people

who are looked after by the local authority and have SEN.

6.81 Schools should ensure that the information is easily accessible by young people and

parents and is set out in clear, straightforward language. It should include

information on the school?s SEN policy and named contacts within the school for

situations where young people or parents have concerns. It should also give details

of the school?s contribution to the Local Offer and must include information on where

the local authority?s Local Offer is published.

6.82 In setting out details of the broad and balanced curriculum provided in each year,

schools should include details of how the curriculum is adapted or made accessible

for pupils with SEN.

[intexasatthe moment]

Reading your post bawdy-nan it does indeed throw Charter 2's silence into high relief .

It's incredibly depressing how little has improved over the years .

Clearly the Charter 2 team must be giving a lot of thought as to how to counter the Harris FED and the possibilty of a Judicial Review . Hopefully while they're regrouping they will address this gaping SEN hole in their proposal .

I suppose the absence of any comment from team Charter 2 is the result of legal advice . As no doubt was team Harris's silence ( until too late ) during the consultation period when they obviously were aware but knew it would be politic to let the situation develop leaving them able to mount a formal challenge of inadequate process .

[landsberger]

intexasatthe moment Wrote:

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

> Reading your post bawdy-nan it does indeed throw

> Charter 2's silence into high relief .

>

> It's incredibly depressing how little has improved

> over the years .

>

> Clearly the Charter 2 team must be giving a lot of

> thought as to how to counter the Harris FED and

> the possibilty of a Judicial Review . Hopefully

> while they're regrouping they will address this

> gaping SEN hole in their proposal .

>

> I suppose the absence of any comment from team

> Charter 2 is the result of legal advice . As no

> doubt was team Harris's silence ( until too late )

> during the consultation period when they obviously

> were aware but knew it would be politic to let the

> situation develop leaving them able to mount a

> formal challenge of inadequate process .

W

This is an interesting perspective, and if Charter 2 was a LA run school, I have no doubt Harris's views would be paramount in the DFE's considerations. But it's also a free school, and, as has been opined to me in the past, failure of procedure is not grounds enough for refusal, much as people seem to think it will or should be. All that would happen, at the worst, would be Charter 2 would need to rerun the consultation process, and is the outcome likely to be substantively different? I don't think so.

[intexasatthe moment]

I guess my views are coloured by personal experience of the most jaw dropping lies, power and bullying exhibited by Westminster and a venture capitalist who were intent on forcing a school,against overwhelming opposition to become an Academy .

Though of course the experience taught me that flouting procedure matters very little if you have lots of money and political influence .

Harris's attitude and threats seem a big deal to me . I think having to re run the consultation would lead to major problems by delaying everything ,and an opening date postponed until 2018 is one of Harris's stated aims .

But ....if a new vision and ethos with a clear offer re SEN were to emerge that would be one positive .

[LondonMix]

Its clear to me that Harris was relying on the shortage of places in the south of Southwark to increase the popularity of Harris Peckham. Once middle class parents were forced to attend through lack of alternative places, the snobbery element that leads that school to be undersubscribed would dissipate making it a more popular choice going forward. I'm not saying snobbery is the only reason its undersubscribed but given its actually quite a good school academically now without any alarming behaviour problems, snobbery plays its part.

If the Charter School opens in 2016, this will in part scupper the demographic dividend the shortage of places was naturally going to provide to Harris Peckham from next year. Please note that Harris ED Boys and Girls are oversubscribed. Harris Peckham might remain undersubscribed until 2018 depending on choices parents north east and west of the school make. Undersubscribed schools are financially insecure as they have virtually the same running costs as full schools but less revenue as revenue is funded per pupil.

So while I don't disagree that a zoned lottery is a good admissions policy, Harris are demanding it out of their own self-interest which can't trump what the community wants in this instance. Distance admissions is allowed under the code of admissions and is a legitimate option. Parents have selected it and Harris shouldn't throw its weight around to intimidate MPs or civil servants. Their attitude is despicable.

Similarly, I am worried about Charter's attitude to SEN. I actually thought Charter behaved pretty badly vis-a-vis Habs. Some of the posts on the forum and allegations of stories leaked to the press were abhorrent.

Its all just so sad that something like education provision could bring out some of the worst traits in human nature.