Lambeth Teacher with Lambeth NUT

The spin the council has put on things is that the plan is to expand provision in Lambeth in the Secondary Phase and that committmets can be met elsewhere. We told them this from the beginning. The one accurate thing in their report is that there was strong opposition to their plans.

The council is now saying that in any case, the likelihood of a population growth is exaggerated. This is not so. If they plan to meet their target of educating 80% of all Lambeth Secondary children by 2009, then the existiung schools, plus those inluded in their present proposals will not be enough. A further school - we think Brixton Hill - is needed.

In the meantime Lambeth Teachers Association recognises that a tremendous battle was won against Blair's flagship disaster. This victory included ourselves, parents, governors and the local community, none less than the residents of Clarence Avenue Sheltered Accommodation who quite rightly didn't feel like moving to make way for a private property developer under the guise of a benefactor for the local children.

Events leading to climbdown

As a façade to pretend that there is a ‘democratic’ process, Lambeth Council are supposedly consulting. The problem for them is that the consultations do not give them the answers they want, so they ignore the consultations. First of all, a parental ballot found that 83% of parents were opposed to their scheme.

So in December 2004 they came up with plan B that nobody wants, either. Governors have unanimously voted against the plans. The plans were put to the school’s AGM by Phyllis Dunipace - she heard unanimous and vocal opposition stated. Councillors quite rightly hold surgeries as part of their work.

Petitions from across the borough have been tabled, but totally ignored. At the December Executive meeting, parents were allowed to make representations on the issue. Two parents did and objected to the proposals root and branch. A third ‘parent’ was called who supported the proposals. This ‘parent’ was unknown to anyone to do with the school and turned out to be a governor of a competing school in the borough! But Lambeth executive members used this bogus parent as being supportive of their plans.

A consultation meeting was called at the school for late in February. At short notice, without the courtesy to tell anyone who might object, the meeting was cancelled.

When the Lib Dem councillor covering the ward, Councillor Pindar graciously received a deputation from Glenbrook, he told them he was unaware of any plans. The next day we find him on the front cover of ‘Liberal Focus’ pictured outside the school and stating ‘Glenbrook’s a good site because we can get it for free’.

Then the campaign discovered something more despicable. When out leafletting, they went on the Clifton site where those in sheltered accommodation are housed. These are the people who will have to be moved - many of them 85 years and over - in order for the plan to go ahead. Would you beliueve that the council did not even have the decency to telk them they were to be moved. They are now up in arms. The image below says it all.

The LEA have messed it up. The opposition is widespread - involving teachers, parents, elderly residents and the governors. In May 2005 on polling day, 300 people voted in a ballot at the school gate. 99% opposed the plan.

At 'consultation' meetings in May, the LEA were shaken by the persistent opposition of campaigners. They didn't advertise the meetings and by the time they got to the third meeting, they decided to rewduce the consultation to giving out leaflets at the school gates.

During the management re-structure, virtually all posts were retained, with no teacher losing pay. With the assurance of Glenbrook's future, we can thoroughly recommend any application to this school

Glenbrook Primary School

The background

With all the subtlety of Basil Fawlty on a bad day, the LEA and Lambeth Council tried to push through the closure of Glenbrook Primary School in favour of an Academy on the present Glenbrook site. Because of protests in relation to there being a 3 -19 Academy, the LEA decided to re-build Glenbrook across the road on the smaller Clifton site, at present sheltered housing, clearly no longer of interest to the Lib Dem/ Tory admin at the Town Hall.

We can be precise about the change: Glenbrook is 3.02 acres. Clifton is 1.38 acres. The fact that there would be little playing space, no dining hall and no nursery class is of no consequence to this administration. Both Education Executive member, Councillor Anthony Bottrall and Deputy Leader, Councillor John Whelan, have been on site to try to persuade the governors that this is a great plan. Education Director Phyllis Dunipace has tried similarly with the staff.

The staff, parents and governors are all opposed to the plans and have said as much. This was clear at the council executive committee, although the executive wheeled out an imposter, who wasn't a parent at the school to 'tell' everyone how well supported their plans are.

The rationale for all this nonsense is of course the shortage of Secondary places in Lambeth, now due to government underfunding that would allow the local administration to build new schools, but the government cannot be blamed for previous adminisatrations - including Labour who allowed Heather du Quensay to close 12 primary and special schools and sell sites and the Labour / Lib Dem administration who in 1995 sold off Dick Shepherd. (What is the current value of Brockwell Gate, where Dick Shepherd once stood? the LEA were given just £800,000 for that sale - talk about sale of the last century)

The Labour group are opposed to current Glenbrook plans, but on the basis of seeking better sites for Academies - ie within the framework of Mr Blair's agenda, just not so potty.

We have produced documentation, soon to be released that criticises academies and looks to alternatives - including Brixton Hill and using BSF money for existing schools.

Academies? NO!

Sheltered housing at Clifton - just right for a Primary Academy. Note the road which children as young as 3 would cross to go to lunch.

One alternative

The Brixton Hill site, as campaigned for by parents and lobbied for by the Nelson Mandela Foundation is a viable, long-term solution that will not disturb any existing school. Only a crackpot scheme as drawn up by this LibDEm-Tory council wouldn't see it this way(even the Labour Group favour Brixton Hill!)