intexasatthe moment

I tend to think that " not oversubscribed " in this context probably means " just enough " .So neither under nor over .

FWIW Jane Fletcher Harris ED Girls gives the same message as that from Academy @Peckham "we are 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

Well put .

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 .

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 .

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

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 .

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 .

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 .)

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 .

Aah ,that makes sense .I'll google how to dampen it .

" Do Harris really have the power to scupper the 2016 opening at this stage? " - I hope not but feel sure that their influence will be felt . My guess would be by reducing the planned admissions number and altering the admissions policy . With that going on they won't need to target delaying the opening date . The letter from the federation is loaded with threats - that the consultation wasn't correctly carried out and that this leaves the process " open to challenge " ,that they'll question the DfE's equalities impact assessment if they don't agree with it ,and that nasty clincher ,already quoted by redjam . 'we will challenge any decisions to proceed with all the means available to us' Not ameliorated by the qualifying " if we feel our schools and vulnerable young people they serve are damaged by this proposal " which they clearly think they are .So change the proposal or we'll fight . And what does this "Having been involved in opening Free Schools we can make some higher level comments about the process and validity of what you are doing ;and what ministers are in danger of doing without adequate thought ." mean ? We have the ear of policy makers and can ensure that they make the "right" decision by giving them food for thought ?

Quite agree about heave ,and feeling sad . I'd like to have more detail/see reports about the "suspect" damage .

"Have I missed a co-ed, non-faith, non-lottery school, within a mile of Charter2? " Academy @Peckham ? One and a half miles ,but closer than Kingsdale .

bonaome - I think that giving siblings priority over those with special medical and social needs it sends the wrong message . And I just think ( probably oversensitive ) that sentences like these " Attention will be given to those pupils who learn most quickly as well as the more able linguists who will also be able to study Mandarin. Talented musicians will be able to apply for a scholarship to support tuition in vocal/instrumental teaching " seem to outshine these "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 I think I'm being over sensitive .

Southwark's free bulky collection is fantastic and yes they take freezers ,fridges etc . You can arrange on line http://www.southwark.gov.uk/info/200084/recycling_and_waste/1667/bulky_waste_collection

Oh dear oh dear oh dear . Guess this is what happens when you do away with LA control of schools ,have no Southwark Admissions Forum ( yes I know ,no longer compulsary ) and have an education system which looks to competition to drive up standards . Having said that I agree with Harris Fed that Charter 2 could have been more imaginative in their offer of admissions policies .The zoned approach with inner and outer zones ( like but not the same as Bacon and Harris Crystal Palace ) . So decreasing impact on other close schools and still giving priority to local residents . Also agree about the seeming curriculum offer being to more academically gifted and low profile of SEN provision . I have sympathy because The Academy@Peckham is always undersubscribed and Charter 2 seems very popular with those who could apply to Peckham . But .... I don't buy the implication that Harris weren't aware of the consultation .Despite the omission from the formal consultation of SOME Harris schools it appears others were consulted . Speaks volumes of the lack of community involvement if the local schools all failed to be aware . And why can't Harris now meet with Charter until September unless their main concern is to delay the process and call foul . And Harris seem to forget that Free Schools are to offer choice ...people want an alternative to the Harris ethos . Dear dear dear .What a waste of money ,time and energy spent on fighting over who gets the pupils/best pupils . And an argument against this dreadful fragmented ,privatised education system .

" The one thing that jumped out at me though is that the Harris Federation seem to have decided to take on the role of pantomime baddie, lobbying to have the opening of the school delayed for at least two more years and the number of places available reduced, saying (p.43) 'we will challenge any decisions to proceed with all the means available to us'. I actually have a slight sympathy for Harris because clearly the new school will affect their intake, but this smacks of serious sour grapes. Some of their stated objections are laughable (i.e. it shouldn't open for two years because otherwise it'll have to have a temporary site - er, what about Harris East Dulwich Primary, still waiting for its own permanent site after two years?). I'm really shocked that Harris wants to take up arms against such strong local support (98% of an extraordinary 1173 responses) for the new school to open. I know Lord Harris has a lot of influence with the DfE but I very much hope in this case he has overreached himself ." Totally gobsmacked at this . Off to read report .

"I think some people's confusion is assuming that taking Jarvis Road as the nodal point means that the school entrance would be there" But Harris ED Girls are having an off site nodal point at j.of Shelbury and Colyton so presumably Charter 2 could have one slightly away from site boundary ?Or does the argument about that nodal point being equi distant between the girls and boys school justify that ? Though I can't see why ,2 different schools ,2 admissions policies .Or does Harris just get what it wants ? Charter 1 has their admissions criteria measured from an entrance some distance from the building doesn't it ? I suppose it might be possible to negotiate a footpath from Jessop Rd to school building if the parcel of land doesn't sit near this boundary ?

Agree - look for T marks ,they commonly indicate maintenance responsibilty . Our title deeds didn't show any but our neighbour's did so we knew on one side where the responsibilty lay .

Yes ,James please explain . How can the admissions policy be a planning consideration ? PS Noticed your wee small hours posts recently ,hope you're ok .

Celia Hammond always want old towels ,sheets etc . http://www.celiahammond.org/lewisham/

Do you think the ants nest in the black plastic bag of leaves I'm hoping will turn into compost is good ? Will it help the process along ?

Did you get a copy of the Title register as well as the plan ? Sometimes this has reference to boundaries and maintenance . Have you tried getting a copy of register and plan for your neighbour ,this might show their responsibilties for boundary maintenance ? Tricky all this I know .Wish you luck .

By why did 2 councillors abstain ? Surely they had a view on such a planning issue ?