intexasatthe moment

Thanks charlottep .

charlottep can I ask what they were prescribed for the stomach cramps ?

Oh yes - so far my personal tally is 3 adults and one very elderly frail person afflicted . Seems to start with sore throat and coughing which morphs into vomiting . The vomiting seems to go on over several days ,not your normal 24 hour bug . GP says airborne ,spread before people aware that they are infected and to be vigilant about containing sneezes/coughs and ruthless with handwashing . Seems a nasty one .

Someone correct me if I'm wrong but I think the council plan to reduce the size of the roundabout ,not remove it .

Thanks for that Molly .

I've sometimes put an article in the wrong trolley as I'm going round in a daze . Sometimes I even realise my mistake and retrieve it .

Well ,not " give " obviously . I've asked elsewhere on the forum with no luck ,feel sure I've seen this discussed somewhere . I'm looking for a relative in the Bromley/Orpington area . Grateful for any pointers .

Good to know - thanks for the info . Having been lees than impressed with some other local opticians ,I might give the shop go .

Just to say that I helped to care for a 96 year old living alone in her own home in Southwark . She recieved 5 visits a day ( 2 carers each visit ) and had a hoist . ( though don't imagine that this meant the family didn't also need to put many hours in as well ) The carers and the hoist were funded by social services ,the client paid a small ( means tested ) fee towards the cost . And this http://www.thiis.co.uk/new-products-cricket.aspx is a fantastic piece of kit which can obviate the need for a hoist in many cases . There are various ways of supporting elderly people so that they can stay in their own homes and Southwark residents have not had the drastic cuts that those in other areas have .

I've found this http://maciak.org/fixmyprinter worked to clear print jobs and restart the spooler - whatever that is .

It looks like the proposal is to retain the roundabout and tree but reduce the overall size . I think that's probably ok ,though I admit I'm not very good a visualising things from plans .

I feel very unconvinced that Southwark want to have anything to do with secondary education in the borough . Renata - my point was that it cannot be desirable for children going through secondary transfer to sit a number of tests ; I would have hoped ( expected ) that the local authority members on the Admission Forum would have been trying to win support from the Academies/Foundation school in the borough to agree on one test that would be acceptable to all . I don't expect Southwark to shrug it's shoulders and go "oh well as academies want to carry out their own individual tests let's let them get on with it " . Both the main political parties ( with the Lib Dems changing horses mid stream to suit their own political agenda ) pushed for schools to become Academies ,schools to be free of local authority control , and amongst other things to formulate and administer their own admissions policies . Southwark embraced this move unlike some authorities who are still resisting . Now ,when there are problems ,rather than acknowledge and address them the driving motivation is to shift the blame - re Charter " oh it wasn't our fault they mismanaged their admissions ,that's nothing to do with us ,we do as the crow flies ". Yes switched from safe walking distance soooooo long ago oh at least 2 years wasn't it ? re schools deciding they want to have their own banding tests to suit their individual and varying banding systems - oh that's what they want ,better let them get on with it . From the lack of clarity over Kingsdales scholarships to the Charter's attitude that they are above the law ( I see the Southwark News is reporting the school as "provisionally " accepting the OSA's judgement ) it would seem that parents can't sit back and assume that schools will abide by codes of practice and statutory requirements . I would have thought that Southwark has a role to play here but I don't think this is going to happen .

Carbonara - I read those threads on Mumsnet ,I think the suggestion was that someone should refer this issue of confusion over scholarships and how the waiting list operates at Kingsdale to the Schools Adjudicator on the grounds that the lack of clarity is in breach of the Admissions Code. This http://www.education.gov.uk/schoolsadjudicator/howwecanhelp/a0076144/how-to-raise-an-objection-to-school-admission-arrangements link to the Schools Adjudicator explains that a parent or parents can raise issues themselves .It looks as though you intially complete an online form.

Article here http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2012/feb/09/ofsted-chief-scrapping-satisfactory-rating quoting head of Ofsted saying reinspections of schools ranked as outstanding but with good teaching due to start in autumn .

It's all a learning curve Metallic - good to be aware of "issues " at a school . Forewarned is forearmed and all that . Good Luck .

And shame on Southwark for doing nothing about the way this school put their admissions policy into practice .

Just read piece in the Southwark News . Head teacher David Sheppard said "If the governors had wanted to establish a school with an element of selection ,it would have been very easy to do so - it can be done through banding ,specialisms or scholarships ..." Mmm like Kingsdale ? ( disclaimer here ....given Kingsdale's geographical location I think balanced selection was the way to achieve a good school. But I also think that all Southwark schools should have the same balanced intake and the same admission policies . ) His comments about why the Charter ignored the Wanley Rd route are less than convincing . "Our admissions policy was inherited from when admissions were managed by Southwark council .The map that the LA used did not include this footpath as a safe walking route ." What and despite the succesful appeals challenging this approach and parents voiced concerns , no one thought to revisit this map ? Not even when Southwark moved from safe walking distance to as the crow flies for distance criteria for primary schools a couple of years ago - as discussed in the LA Admission Forum on which David Sheppard has a place ? What really gets to me is the attitude evident in David Sheppard's remark " what you can't do is change the policy to meet the needs of individual parents and families " The school blatantly continued to adminster it's admission policy in an unfair way and now tries to shift the blame on to Southwark and also to argue that it's a group of selfishly self interested individuals ? How dare those parents have the temerity to want their needs met ( and who else will see that their needs are met? The Charter ?, Southwark Council ? ) ,how arrogant of them to rely on the school to play fair . Never mind they'll soon be put in their place ,trying to inflence the school's ( the school that they paid for out of their taxes ) admissions policy ! The outrage ,what's it got to do with them - leave it to the school !

Sorry again metallic - was referring to a thread on here about the Charter school that for 10 years ( and despite succesful appeals including the issue and parents bringing the matter to their attention )refused to correctly implement their stated "safe walking distance " criteria for admissions .They relied only on routes that could be driven along .

Sorry metallic ,last summer the whole issue of Kingsdale where a number of teachers left and allegations of exam misspractice was raised and discussed on the EDF . Clearly it can do a school untold damage to have rumours circulating like that and several posts were removed . The exam business has been investigated . I believe that there is some requirement that the findings are confidential . I'm not completely sure regarding the confidentiality bit but it is unfortunate that there has been no public feedback ( or I've missed it if there has ) because it does rather still ( in my mind anyway ) leave a cloud hanging over the school - and the poor kids who took their exams at that time .

And i'm a bit :-S at the notion that this thread has been moved into the Family Room . Education and discussion about standards at local schools is only of interest to "families " - yes of course ,a good education is not something to concern us all . What's that you say - " children getting a poor shot at school ,schools setting their pupils the example of fiddling their admission policies might have wider social implications " ? Oh well ,that's too large an issue for us all to worry about - lets leave it to the parents . And while we're at it we can lay the blame for all that trouble we had last summer at their feet as well . Right now lets get back to the EDF general thread and issues like the colour of recyling bins that concern us all . edited to say - sorry admin to criticise your action so that I can get on my soapbox . Of course it's sometimes difficult to draw a line about where posts go .Can't please everyone . Obviously from the number of posts I'm making ,I think this is a great Forum .

Shall we open a book on when ydrmdy's post will be removed ?

Do you mean the post including this bit Smiler ? The local authority's view is that the school admissions policy of the Charter School, including use of a safe walking distance oversubscription criterion, is in keeping with the School Admissions Code of Practice. Southwark Council does not provide a safe walking distance measurement service to The Charter School nor does it advise on which routes to include/exclude as ?safe routes? for school admission purposes. Our view is that this aspect of the policy is a matter for the academy to determine as it is its own admission authority.

FatherJack - representing the Charter on the forum has to be done by the head . Of the 14 meetings (Sept 2006 to Nov 2011 ) shown on Southwark's site Dave Sheppard ( hope I've spelt that correctly ) has attended twice . It looks as though many heads attend very rarely so this seems to be quite usual . Carbonara- I quite agree with you . But I've seen nothing that would lead me to believe that Southwark will help or take any action on this - although I believe that it is actually a requirement in the Admissions Code that policies should be clear and understanable . I've got a feeling ( could be wrong ) that the Admissions Code also says something about schools using a common test if they are testing for banding but this extract from the Admissions Forum minutes (29/9/10 ) Testing arrangements ? as academies want to carry out their own individual tests, the LA will no longer be co-ordinating this across Southwark. Academies and Kingsdale School are expected to carry out their own banding tests. gives an idea of who is really dictating procedures and how concerned Southwark are to ensure a smooth admissions process for children to go through . And this extract from the constitution clearly shows Southwark's aim to comply with the Admissions Code The Admission Forum must act in accordance with the provision of the Code and should refer an objection to the Schools Adjudicator where it identifies policy, practice or oversubscription criteria that may be unfair or that do not comply with the manadatory provision of the Code; and ,bearing in mind what happened at the Charter ,the gap between the aim and obligation and the practice .

Carbonara - link here http://www.southwark.gov.uk/info/200142/school_management/1007/schools_admissions_forum/1 Although you'll notice from this that the last published minutes relate to a meeting on 7 Feb 2011 . This plus the fact that Southwark appears to have allowed the Charter school to carry on mismanaging it's admission policy for over 10 years might lead you to think that it's a rather disinterested ,powerless talking shop . I may be unfairly critical ,perhaps I misunderstand it's role ,although it's published aims What the forum does The forum has a key role in ensuring the admissions system is fair, that it promotes social equity and does not disadvantage children. It also ensures that the admissions system is straightforward and easy for parents and carers to understand. Forums also monitor the local authority to ensure that we are complying with the schools admissions code. seem clear enough . It would be good to hear what Glenn Garcia Head of Pupil Access Children's Services Southwark Council has to say on Southwark's role generally and including the Admissions Forum on what we can expect in terms of monitoring ,applying an overview ,helping to ensure that admissions policies are both fair on paper and in practice .

Because I've had some difficulty in obtaining clear information from Southwark councillors ( not James as it happens ) on this subject I am posting a few points below in case anyone else is interested or confused ( as I was ) . It is no longer compulsory for local authorities to have Admissions Forums - but they are free to retain them if they wish to do so . The adjudicator is required to consider whether admission arrangements comply with the Admissions Code and relevant law (Admissions Code paragraph 3.1). Under the new code the Adjudicator no longer tells the admission authority how to change their admission arrangements. Previously if there were several possible changes that would bring the arrangements into compliance the Adjudicator would tell the admission authority which changes to make. Now the Adjudicator simply tells the admission authority what is wrong and it is up to them to fix it. Local authorities must continue to provide annual reports to the Adjudicator as to how school admissions are working, they are now also required to publish them locally - paragraph 3.23 of the Admissions Code. I'm not an expert on this subject - I imagine fairadmissions who posted on the Charter thread might be - and it's taxed my brain cells a bit to glean this information . If I'm giving incorrect info then I'll be interested to hear the details .