Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Sponsors often end up not paying the required amount


http://education.guardian.co.uk/newschools/story/0,,2048485,00.html


"Even with this sort of inducement, sponsors proved very hard to find. A few expressed an interest, only to withdraw as they saw the depth of local hostility. Those who stayed were remarkably reluctant actually to part with cash. In May 2006, the Guardian reported that most of them had not paid the ?2m. Four academies that had been open for nearly a year had not received a penny from their sponsor. With 27 academies up and running, sponsors had paid up only ?26m.


It's partly for this reason that, last year, the government suddenly announced a revolution in the way the academy programme is run. Sponsors would no longer have to put any money at all upfront. Instead they are invited to make "endowments" over the years.


"

  • 1 month later...

Interesting to see that Councilor Richard Thomas complains about the Labour councilors not defending the academy schools in local meetings...when hes a Lib Dem and they dont seem to keen on them (or are they just keeping quiet?).


You can check out his views on


http://cllrrthomas.wordpress.com/


and post your response to hi comments


It will be interesting to see what the architects come up with next time, it must be better than the prison bl;ock which got slated on all sites. The problem is its still too many boys on one site - will the Council/Harris ever come clean on why it has to be so many boys crammed on to one site???????

OK then. Just read the Councillors website about the Academy - look like they are supporting it against the ideological position of their party (did'nt really know they even did ideology)


And that is an example of why you need to research before you blog - Me bad - apologies

As the school sits on the edge of the Nunhead and East Dulwich districts we have requested that the local councilors in the 2 wards have a cross party non-political joint community council group. While Nunhead appear happy to do so the East Dulwich councilors are a no to the idea.


Given the discussions, meetings and concerns of local parents why would they not want to do this? The Lib Dems said that the EDGE group were already doing very well and did not need such a body. I'd disagree - we have not been able to get Harris to talk with us. And as for the Council - well thats been another blank so far.



These are some of the questions that need answering and having a joint community group would support the campaign to get a good school on the site as thats what we all want!


How will the school be run

How will 950 boys work on the site

How will students be moved between the two sites on a regular basis 5 days a week

How can the school be a flagged as a sports academy if it has no playing fields of its own? Where is the athletics track that they would need, the pool (the girls one is being knocked down, so we can forget about that) etc.... Peckham Rye has some football/rugby pitches, but you need more than that.

How many parents will be allowed as Governors (I'd imagine the minimum of 1, as that the way Harris operate)

Why will they not consider having one mixed school over the two sites

How will the impact of having staggered start/end times for the students be managed.


Harris and Southwark education have already messed it up once - what will happen second time around?????

Hello all, taking my Forum life in my hands entering this debate, but jumping journo asked for feedback and some people don't seem fully up to speed (kel). Will admit straight up that am new to the topic, but did attend the latest round of discussions.

1. it has been decreed that the new school will be an academy and academies have private sponsors. Ours is Lord Harris, of carpets and other academy fame.

2. it has been decreed by southwark that the site on the edge of the rye is the site.

3. it has been decreed that there will be a 950 pupil school on the site.


These do not seem negotiable. I'm not saying that it's right, but that is the decision made.

The latest round of discussion meetings were as a result of the almighty fuss kicked up over the last set of designs submitted. Variously described as ugly, unsuitable generally sh*t. So they (Harris Inc.) have sacked the architects and got a new guy on board and held the meetings to try to understand what would be acceptable to locals. So KKel the "mess up" was the terrible previous design. And now they are trying to find an acceptable proposal.

The latest round of meetings revealed that broadly the school should be at the southern end of the site (away from Friern Road) with the building close to the road so the playground backs onto the houses rather than the building looming over the local streets.

For my part it seemd a genuine attempt to find an acceptable design. It was made clear that the meetings were not to discuss the suitablity of the site generally, the size of the school or the philosophical/political/educational pros and cons of the project - it was just about building design.

As a new comer to the process I found some fellow attendees very entrenched and unwilling to accept that there was a new chapter opening. They kept harking back to battles previously fought, or battles that the organisers had made perfectly clear were not for fighting that night. There was a lot of arguing total non points and some of the attendees were pretty irritating. I'd urge anyone reading this to try to attend the next round of meetings - some new blood is needed based on my experience. I have no wish to dismiss the great work done by locals in getting the last lot of designs binned, and in no way condone some of the tactics/decisions made by Southwark/Harris on the issue. But at a design meeting, fight clever and fight on design, not the rest of the issues.

(Ducks for cover and regrets posting?)

I wouldn't have called that a "mess up". I assumed that phrase meant there had been a misunderstanding somewhere along the lines but it just seems to have been bad luck on the architechts part. But thank you all the same for bringing me up to speed *rolls eyes*

Katgod a word of advice... don't assume if someone asks a question that may seem a little outdated that they don't know the full story. It's all about good debating skills ;-)

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

    • I like empanadas. I don't think Chango is a massive chain - it's got a few stores all in London I believe (stand to be corrected if I've got that wrong). I don't see a problem with them opening on the Lane personally. I really like Chacarero, but that doesn't mean that they should be immune from competition - if they're successful and open a couple more stores, are we then meant to stop supporting them for being a 'chain'?  That opening post does sound a lot like marketing spiel though. Is the OP perhaps connected to the new business I wonder?
    • According to what I can see online, Dynamic Vines and Cave de Bruno sell totally different kinds of wine to each other.  Dynamic Vines  "work with independent winemakers who produce outstanding wine using sustainable practices in the vineyard and minimal intervention in the cellar".  Cave de Bruno specialises in French wines and spirits from small independent producers. So two different USPs, and no doubt two different but overlapping customer bases who can afford these wines. Probably different again to the people mainly  shopping for wine at Majestic or the Co op. On the other hand, the two empanada shops appear on the face of it to be selling virtually identical products. But time will tell, won't it? Let's see how they are both doing in - say - a couple of years' time. Impossible, of course, to compare that with how they would have done if there had been only one of them. I just feel more  sorry for the original one than for  the one which can apparently already afford to have a number of shops in places like Mayfair and Highgate. I'm tempted to buy something there every week, and I don't even like that kind of pastry 🤣
    • Not only can he turn olive oil into Vermouth, but also water into a wine. A true miracle worker.  I wouldn't say a wine shop sells a wide variety of things - and there are two right next to each other.  And once upon a time, upmarket pizza shops were very specific. So were burritos etc. These Argentinian cornish pasties are clearly becoming mainstream; we should consider ourselves lucky to be witnessing this exciting upward trend within our lifetimes and on OUR HIGH STREET. We can tell our grandkids that we remember when there was no internet and no empanadas.  I'm sure that if the family empanada people have a good business head, they'll be able to ride this wave of competition, just like Bruno has. 
    • Very economical. Are you available for events? I've got a gathering of 5000 coming up soon. What could you knock up with two little fishes and five loaves of bread? Cod in breadcrumbs? Fish finger sandwiches? Spanish-style croquetas de bacalao with a Romesco sauce? It's BYOB for beer, so there's no need to worry about that and I've managed to do an unbelievable deal on water and wine. Drop me a DM on here or ask for Dave or Jesus (pronounced 'Hay-Zooze') in The Herne, left hand side of the bar.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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