UK NEWS
RURAL SCHOOLS ORDER 'HYPOCRITICAL'
Jim Knight ordered local authorities to protect rural schools
Wednesday January 30,2008
Ministers were accused of hypocrisy when they ordered local councils to keep rural schools open - after backing more closures last month.
Schools minister Jim Knight wrote to local authorities telling them to protect village primaries after a series of media headlines warned that hundreds could be shut down. The letter followed Government guidance last month that suggested councils can "take the opportunity" to close schools with empty places.
Mr Knight said: "Rural schools are central to the life of village communities. Over the last 10 years, we have made it a statutory requirement for councils to presume that rural schools should stay open.
"There is not, and never has been, any policy for closing rural schools. I am writing to local authorities to underline their legal duty to protect popular rural schools."
Guidance issued in December said maintaining surplus school places represents "a poor use of resources".
"The department expects local authorities to make the removal of surplus places a priority in their planning," the guidance said. The document said councils could consider "amalgamation and rationalisation" of primary schools in their area.
"Local authorities may, for example, take the opportunity to reorganise primary provision, close schools with consistently poor performance and/or excessive surplus places and place new buildings under the management of stronger heads," it said.
Liberal Democrat schools spokesman David Laws branded the Government's policy "confused and hypocritical".
"This week, ministers are telling everyone that the closure of smaller schools is not on the Government's agenda," he said.
"But official guidance issued last month tells local authorities to close smaller schools and remove surplus places as a 'priority'. Local authorities are being told that unless they follow the Government's blueprint, which includes closing up to one in 20 schools, they will not get the money for new primary schools."
RURAL SCHOOLS ORDER 'HYPOCRITICAL'
31.01.08, 1:14am
As a country we really need an upfront debate about what we want our country to look like, and stop letting things just happen by drift.
It needs to be an honest debate, somethings cost serious money and might have less effect than we imagine. Are we prepared to pay for that ?
Do we want to village life to continue, or are we happy for villages to die and rot, and have 99% of the pouplation live in crowded towns ?
If we are serious about keeping villages going then they need schools - small schools - uneconomic post offices, subsidised shops, good public transport, and live-in police. And we will have to stop building huge new estates everytime a builder buys a field.
At the moment all these things are being eaten away by stealth. http://com1.runboard.com/bhomeland
Posted by: DanVox Report Comment
RURAL SCHOOL CLOSURES
30.01.08, 9:32pm
This all part of Broon's policy, carried on from Bliar's in giving larger grants to labour voting areas than rural ones.
Our local council had the second lowest grant in the country last year, and the lowest this year. This is the rich south containing a great many pensioners and low paid agricultrural workers The average wages in this area are among the lowest in the country, but we are in the RICH south so we get low grants.
Posted by: exnomad Report Comment
To view all 'Have Your Say' comments, click this button...