Glasgow schools occupied against closure

[Fullyplumped]

Oh the Labour Party is desperate to be popular, with business, bankers and their millionaire pals. Not to mention Deutsche Post who they wanna flog off part of Royal Mail too./ They don't give a fuck about being popular. They have an agenda and fuck whoever gets caught up in the aftermath.

As for the SSP, well they're not closing schools, they're not asking people to accept worsening T&C's at work, they're not handing over billions to bankers, but cutting the money to education..... Now i'm a member of neither party, but I know which one is shafting people, and guess what, it's not the SSP.

Ooh, that could be an article in Socialist Voice. I can just imagine the comrades reading that and all saying "Yeah, that Fedayn's got those Labourites summed up all right. If we were in charge, we'd... we'd... we'd.... "

 

[Fedayn]

Ooh, that could be an article in Socialist Voice. I can just imagine the comrades reading that and all saying "Yeah, that Fedayn's got those Labourites summed up all right. If we were in charge, we'd... we'd... we'd.... "

Now let's look properly.... They are giving billions to banks, they are hoping to flog off part of Royal Mail to DP, they are desperate to be liked by business, Mandelson the example. And they openly admit to being at ease with the rich and as Blair admitted they are comfortable with the widening wealth gap. And as you admit Lab councillors will ultimately do what the LP tells them and not what their voters want. So, what we have is correct. Nice to see that you accept that what could be an article in the SSV is actually factually correct. Seems fair enough to me....

 

[q_w_e_r_t_y]

The most the parents with children at those schools can hope for is that their schools will not be among those to be closed, and that is what the parent's campaign seems to aimed at achieving. The council runs the whole city, not just a bit of Maryhill, and the strategy is about providing grade A schools for all Glasgow's children. I suppose the SSP will be trying to tell the parents that it's different. .

Of course these parents are trying to save their individual school - my sons school is closing next year as part of a previous round of cost cutting I know how devastating it can be for a community to be face with the loss of such an important local focal point - but the point is that these parent are not trying to save their childrens education at the expense of any others, they want *all* children in glasgow to have access to high quality, individualised, local community based education.

A few years ago I was involved in the campaign to save Falkirk NHS services, first the maternity unit, then the A&E and eventually (as predicted) the whole hospital. Meanwhile Stirling residents were campaigning to save day surgery, then minor surgery and eventually (as predicted) the whole hospital.

The SSP got us and the Stirling activists together so that we could campaign across Forth Valley, for relevant local services, no-one in Falkirk wanted to see Stirling shut and vice versa. In the meantimes, the local Labour MPs for Falkirk and Stirling started indignant letter writing campaigns about why "their" hopital should be saved - even going so far as holding public meetings and setting up petitions which were effectively campaigning for the other hospital to be shut.

I can see exactly the same thing happening here - outraged Labour councillors demanding that *their* school isnt closed, nice photo-ops with parents and banners as backdrops, carefully submitted articles to local newspapers while the council try to sort out which school to close based on the numbers of votes its likely to lose.

 

[tangentlama]

Why would I need a pager to praise what is a very good strategy for the city?

It's not a good strategy for the local children and parents.

 

[danny la rouge]

Fewer, but better schools for all Glasgow's schoolchildren. Yes, I see exactly how it sounds.

Like an apologist for cuts in the Tory years.

It's a cut to services. However you rationalize it to yourself.

 

[scifisam]

Could someone do me a favour, and precis for me the reasons for closing these schools, and the reasons against?

I admit that I have a prejudice against old schools being joined to make new. I'm kinda assuming that there will be some element of PFI involved in this - correct me if I'm wrong - but there are still problems even if there is no PFI.

One school I taught in was a new building, PFI, of course. It's actually a little difficult to get started on how bad this building was. One example: the school was shut down for two weeks after a student tried to open a window.

The handle to open the window was easily accessible and looked like a normal handle. It could be turned within a few seconds. These windows were not allowed to be opened at all, ever ever ever, even on the hottest days. Nobody ever said why, even to the teachers - it was just the rules. You were also not allowed to hang blinds (if you even covered the windows with posters, you were told to take them down). On those really hot days, that meant you were sitting in a greenhouse. Surprise, surprise, one day a child tries to open the window and - kaboom! - it all comes falling down on him.

Thankfully, said child didn't die; school was closed until repairs were made (and no-one knew how long that would be). The LEA had to pay for all the repairs and adjustments - one of which meant that no window could ever be opened at all by anyone. I wonder how on Earth that met fire safety standards.

The school I teach at now is about to be closed and moved into another, new, PFI building with two other schools. Not a single one of the teachers is in favour. Not enough of the parents have said anything either way. The building is one of the best functioning school buildings I've ever taught in, and some of it is only 18 years old. The rest is much older, and quite beautiful. It'll make lovely flats for whoever buys them off whichever building firm gets the contract.

I've also taught at a school which was mid-stage- I was there in June, and it was due to move to the new buildings the September of the year following (15 months later). In that time, as it had been for some time since the building work started, there were no dining facilities. There was a pre-fab into which people could bring sandwiches or line up dolefully for the 'free school meals' sandwiches of unrefrigerated cheese and salad, which always ran out halfway through so that the free school meals kids were left with food that was curdling mayonnaise, rotten tomatoes and a gherkin. Then you had fifteen minutes to get your food, gobble it down, and leave, because the room was so small that everyone was on a tight schedule. You couldn't continue eating in the playground, because there wasn't one - or a sports field - because it was a construction site.

Even year 10s didn't know where to go because their last pre-fab classroom had disappeared, and they had no idea where the new one was. Computers? Hah! They had them for about three days before they all got stolen, in the cardboard buildings that you could saw into like slicing a pizza. Each classroom still had interactive whiteboards, but they were useless without projectors, which had gone with the computers. The interactive whiteboards left so little space in those portacabins that you couldn't even have a normal whiteboard there. You could beg and borrow a little stand-up flip-chart sometimes, but they really are very small, and the rooms weren't big enough for them. The rooms weren't even big enough to fit the right number of chairs for a small class.

So, yup. Move to a new building. For the kids that are at the school during the move, forget about giving them classrooms, whiteboards, or chairs. Take them out of a school that does perfectly well, architecturally, and send them to a school that doesn't. Much better to combine resources, and, um, make primary school kids travel a lot further to school.

Boost the local economy by giving private contractors money to build office blocks and then charge you for mistakes they make. And sell Victorian schools off for flats at a price that means the council never makes a profit.

 

[danny la rouge]

Could someone do me a favour, and precis for me the reasons for closing these schools, and the reasons against?

Under the local authority proposals, Wyndford Primary would close and pupils would be transferred to Parkview Primary. St Gregory's would also shut with pupils moving to St Mary's Primary.

Parents argue that the proposals would kill the community, put pupils' safety at risk and have a negative impact on their education.

Across the country, communities are being divested of their primary schools, their post offices, their focal-points, and this rips the heart out of a community. If you want a healthy, functioning community, it needs certain amenities to give it a focus. If there's no primary school, maybe young families won't move into the area. I've seen the knock-on effect in communities of losing their school, then their post office, then shops close down, the area becomes desolate; a ghost town. This community is defending itself against bureaucrats rationalizing the life out of an area they love.

I know the area reasonably well; I used to live not far away. The journey from Wyndford to Parkview would take children along and across Maryhill Road, a major arterial route into the city. There is absolutely no need for this. The local community don't want it. And these closures are only two of a raft of primary and nursery closures right across the city.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/glasgow_and_west/7983056.stm

 

[Garcia Lorca]

The council runs the whole city, not just a bit of Maryhill, and the strategy is about providing grade A schools for all Glasgow's children. I suppose the SSP will be trying to tell the parents that it's different. Not even T Sheridan could pull that one off.

ive kept quite on this one so far but that really is a cracking fucking quote. "the council run the whole city"? yes and they are doing a really good job at it! At the risk of taking it waaayyy of topic we could make a list of cuts and failures that the labour government is making and HAS made around Glasgow.

The parents (have you even spoke to them? or is this the party line your spouting?) are trying to save their schools, but are also highlighting the bigger picture from across Glasgow. Schools that have been deemed in such poor repair (how did they get like that, if they even are like that?). You see, people are sick and tired of the hearts being ripped out there communities. Education should be available for all, in every community, in every scheme in Glasgow. The idea that its for Class A schools for Class A education or whatever you said is rediculous. its going to effect teachers, nursery staff, parents, children.. on and on.

People are living in poverty, education (i believe) is one way of addressing poverty. Education should be in every community and it should be a well looked after commodity.

To suggest that they are being used by the SSP tbh, quite pathetic. They are trying to get a message out, no one is telling them what to say or how to do it, thats their decision. After all, doesnt every success or failure come to the highlighted attention of people somehow? and if it was kiss arse tale of something GCC has done all fluffy and shiney, you would be the first one to be all over it posing for the media.. just it doesnt happen that often.

theres more i wish to say on this, im not the most elegant of typers and this isnt my favourite format for putting it across. ill leave it there for now.