Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
interestrateripoff

Half Of School Districts Face Places Crunch

Recommended Posts

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-23931974

Almost half of England's school districts will have more primary pupils than places within two years, the Local Government Association (LGA) has said.

Some local areas will face a 20% shortfall in places by 2015, according to analysis of official data from 2012.

The squeeze has been attributed to the rising birth rate and to immigration.

The government said it had more than doubled funding for new school places, but local authorities want more control over how that money is spent.

The LGA's warning comes as the government opens 93 free schools, raising the total to 174 and providing 43,000 new school places.

Not surprising really, something the most posters on here have been expecting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just saw shyster Gove on the TV (sky) blaming the last lot of his chums when they wore red instead of blue/yellow. :rolleyes::huh:

He's only had 3 years to take his thumb out his a$$ and do something.

Oh and nicely glossed over the immigration connection when challenged by the reporter. Tosser!

'Free' schools, has there ever been a worse turn of phrase.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just saw shyster Gove on the TV (sky) blaming the last lot of his chums when they wore red instead of blue/yellow. :rolleyes::huh:

He's only had 3 years to take his thumb out his a$$ and do something.

Oh and nicely glossed over the immigration connection when challenged by the reporter. Tosser!

'Free' schools, has there ever been a worse turn of phrase.

Great planning with free schools and academies by the govt. Local authorities have a legal duty to provide a place for every child, but have no power over free schools and academies, can't increase their size to take more pupils and the govt actively encourages state schools to change status.

Free schools will lead to a load of separate schools divided along wealth and religious line and not integrating. A muslim school here, a jewish school there, then a christian and a hindu school all separate. Then some funded/supported by big business. God knows what they all will be teaching as only required a limited adherence to national curriculum, and ofsted inspections are a joke.

Edited by sf-02

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great planning with free schools and academies by the govt. Local authorities have a legal duty to provide a place for every child, but have no power over free schools and academies, can't increase their size to take more pupils and the govt actively encourages state schools to change status.

Free schools will lead to a load of separate schools divided along wealth and religious line and not integrating. A muslim school here, a jewish school there, then a christian and a hindu school all separate. Then some funded/supported by big business. God knows what they all will be teaching as only required a limited adherence to national curriculum, and ofsted inspections are a joke.

Not a problem with how many types...people should be free to choose, but all parents of children should have the free choice of a local excellent school to go to that is not overcrowded and the quality of education is second to none....all schools should be good schools and all teachers should be good teachers that can bring out the best from good and the not so good pupils...... ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just saw shyster Gove on the TV (sky) blaming the last lot of his chums when they wore red instead of blue/yellow. :rolleyes::huh:

He's only had 3 years to take his thumb out his a$$ and do something.

3 years is next to no time to sort out something like this, hundreds if not thousands of new schools need to be built, thousands and thousands of new teachers need to be trained. Just think about how long it takes to do all of the above.

These are issues that needed to be addressed 5 or even 10 years ago, the fault very much lies with labour.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, not in South Tyneside (near Newcastle Upon Tyne).

After the change of government in May 2010, no payment under the Primary Capital Programme was received for 2011/12 and the funding stream has been halted.

The coalition Government cancelled the Building Schools for the Future (BSF) Programme and announced its intention to significantly reduce capital funding to schools.

From 2011 Devolved Formula Capital to schools has been reduced by between 60% and 80% annually, and cuts have been made to Local Authority education repairs and maintenance grants

www.southtyneside.info

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What, that's it?

I read the article and some of the comments but nowhere does it say why or what was so wasteful about it, just a bold unsupported statement (of Propaganda).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A school near me was closed and demolished a few years ago due to a lack of pupils. Since then a couple of free schools have opened. Have to wonder if the demand could have been forseen.

No it couldn't. You just can't predict how many five-year-olds there will be in any particular year by just looking at how many babies were born five years before. It doesn't work like that. Oh no, wait, it does. Who knew?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No it couldn't. You just can't predict how many five-year-olds there will be in any particular year by just looking at how many babies were born five years before. It doesn't work like that. Oh no, wait, it does. Who knew?

It's a relatively small city, and people of course come and go, but looks a bit hasty to say the least. The razing of the building is the icing on the cake, the free schools have to go elsewhere as the site is already earmarked for something else now. Brownfield development at its finest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What, that's it?

I read the article and some of the comments but nowhere does it say why or what was so wasteful about it, just a bold unsupported statement (of Propaganda).

Money was spent on salaries rather than new building. Largely true in my experience (kids at one primary and wife TA-ing at another). Salaries and smart bits of kit (electronic whiteboards, fancy playgrounds, etc), but nothing to increase the number of places.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A school near me was closed and demolished a few years ago due to a lack of pupils. Since then a couple of free schools have opened. Have to wonder if the demand could have been forseen.

Both my old schools were sold for the land and are now housing estates.....another local school sold most of their playing fields for housing. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Both my old schools were sold for the land and are now housing estates.....another local school sold most of their playing fields for housing. ;)

Secondary school closed. Council wanted to make £2m selling land for houses. Free school have aquired school for free...

http://www.oldham-chronicle.co.uk/news-features/8/news-headlines/81583/free-school-row

http://www.oldham-chronicle.co.uk/news-features/8/news-headlines/82128/free-school-prepares-to-welcome-first-class

And another

http://www.oldham-chronicle.co.uk/news-features/8/news-headlines/81274/mcmahon-hits-out-over-free-school-project

Edited by SarahBell

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The school places squeeze is Labour's toxic gift to Michael Gove

Labour likes to make great play of its investment in the Building Schools for the Future programme, which was so wasteful a way of expanding school provision that Gove very sensibly axed it.

Even if that were true, then axing it and doing nothing was very irresponsible.

As it is.. playing the 'blame labour' game is daft. Gove has been a disaster at education, trying to centralise control and impose an ideological approach with a disregard of reality that would make Chairman Mao blush.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And of course,

This has absolutely nothing at all to do with immigration which many MPs are sure is GOOD for the UK

Shhhh! Immigrants are hard working, don't use public services and never ever commit crime. We lived in mud huts before they arrived and gave us fire and civilisation. True story.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   219 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.