New Portobello High School - PPAG win legal appeal

[seanie]

Consider all Porty school options

[little miss moffat]

http://www.scribd.com/doc/109463626/Por ... ing-Report

Portobello Public Meeting Report

[David Robertson]

Waste of a read, waste of time and totally ineffective !

Only my opinion of course !

[Pal of Porty]

Waste of a read, waste of time and totally ineffective! Only my opinion of course !

...And mine. They claim it is un-scientific then go on to quote numbers and percentages - mental.

[little miss moffat]

Email received from Keiza Dugdale, too long to post lol - but took this part out of it: Myself, Sheila and Maureen will write again to the Committee saying that we have received substantial negative feedback to the report from attendees and recognise the error we have made in the attempts to analyse the results. More focus should therefore be given to the raw data.

I have asked for a copy of the proposed letter and new analysis.

[David Robertson]

Email received from Keiza Dugdale, too long to post lol - but took this part out of it: Myself, Sheila and Maureen will write again to the Committee saying that we have received substantial negative feedback to the report from attendees and recognise the error we have made in the attempts to analyse the results. More focus should therefore be given to the raw data.

I have asked for a copy of the proposed letter and new analysis.

LMM hello again.

If I pm an e-mail address will you forward a copy of Miss Dugdale's e-mail ?

I wonder why all of us on the contact list did not get this e-mail !

[little miss moffat]

Yeah, no problem David.

I emailed her last night, along with Maureen Child, the email I have is her response to my email. But will gladly sent it on to you - I just didnt want to put the long email on here lol.

Btw - I am happy to copy and paste the whole email if others want to read it.

[Doris]

Just received this from Kezia Dugdale:

This is just a further note to say that we have now withdrawn the report from the Council and deleted it from our respective websites.

I am personally very sorry that we’ve got to a point where this endeavour, started with the best of intentions, is seen to be potentially damaging the case for a new school on the park and viewed as misrepresenting the views of the community.

I hope you can accept my apology and be assured that my commitment to a new school on the park, as soon as possible, is unstinting.

Kind regards,
Kez Dugdale

[David Robertson]

Just received this from Kezia Dugdale:

This is just a further note to say that we have now withdrawn the report from the Council and deleted it from our respective websites.

I am personally very sorry that we’ve got to a point where this endeavour, started with the best of intentions, is seen to be potentially damaging the case for a new school on the park and viewed as misrepresenting the views of the community.

I hope you can accept my apology and be assured that my commitment to a new school on the park, as soon as possible, is unstinting.

Kind regards,
Kez Dugdale

May we ask what you wrote to Ms. Dugdale to illicit that response ?

[Doris]

The conclusions drawn by the report were not backed up statistically. As Sheila Gilmore herself wrote "[The Report] offers a quantitative outcome from what was intended to be, and indeed was a qualitative process.

[neilking]

Btw - I am happy to copy and paste the whole email if others want to read it.

Yes please.

[little miss moffat]

Btw - I am happy to copy and paste the whole email if others want to read it.

Yes please.

Thanks for your email.

I’m sorry that you are so disappointed with the report. Please let me explain the process we went through to get to this point.

The Process
All the paper left on the table, whether that be annotated maps, post its, notes on agendas etc were packed away on the night of the meeting in to one box and opened up on the following Monday morning by a member of my office (who was not at the meeting) and a member of Sheila Gilmore’s team (who was).

Under our instruction, their first task was to essentially transcribe all of the notes, in whatever form they came, in to one document from which the report could be drafted. This was done in an excel spread sheet which is attached. (I would have preferred to have uploaded this file on to my website for everyone to access but cannot get the formatting to work – if you have the IT skills to get me through adding this document to Scribd, I would appreciate your help.)

It is important to note that this raw data version has also been provided to the Council with the report.

Each comment was then given a code which allocated it to a subject heading i.e. “A” meant Appeal, “CG” common good etc. A full key of the codes and what they stood for is available in the second tab. This was used to sort the comments so that they could be aggregated for the purposes of the report.

I have received a number of emails overnight, like yours, very unhappy with the contents of the report. One person in particular made the critical point that the mistake we have made here is to have attempted a quantitative analysis of a qualitative process.

Others have said that the report fails to recognise strength of feeling and indeed the weight given to one option over another. That is also a very fair comment. I am sure you will appreciate however that is simply a by-product of the process outlined above.

Resolutions
Myself, Sheila and Maureen will write again to the Committee saying that we have received substantial negative feedback to the report from attendees and recognise the error we have made in the attempts to analyse the results. More focus should therefore be given to the raw data.

That said, I do think it’s important that you submit your own views to the Council process either as an individual, or through a PFANs submission. The latter option would also be well placed to further highlight the problems with the report outlined by yourself and acknowledged above.

What’s next?
A couple of people have questioned my commitment to a new school on the Park in their emails. Let me be absolutely clear that I am fully committed to a new Portobello High School on the park. Furthermore, I believe that every effort must be taken by the Council to fully investigate all legal avenues possible to make that happen. I am confident that the Council officers and indeed the Education Convener are fully committed to this goal as well.

That said, I have also recently received a large number of emails from constituents furious that the Council had previously made no attempt to draft “a Plan B.” In that sense, I believe the discussion had at the public meeting and reflected in the report, is a substantial contribution to that process.

For my own part, I have also written to both the Cabinet Secretary for Education and the Local Government and Planning Minister urging them in the strongest possible terms to investigate the powers to advance wellbeing that they have under the 2003 Local Government Act.

I have also tabled Parliamentary Questions around the scope for a Private Act of Parliament which has clarified that a Private Act could come forward at any time and would not need to wait for the start of a new legislative programme.

Whilst my commitment to a new school on the Park is unstinting, I recognise that there will now be a substantial delay to the new school build starting and that has serious consequences for the pupils currently in the school, and those soon to start.

Consequences which will be compounded further by the prospective closure of Castlebrae High School and the additional students that would bring to Portobello. I have therefore been pushing very hard for the Council to do an early report in to the additional work the existing Portobello High needs to stay safe and as close to suitable is it possibly could under the current circumstances.

If there are further actions you believe I could be taken at this stage to advance the case for a new school on the Park – please don’t hesitate to get in touch.

Kind regards,

Kez Dugdale

On behalf of Sheila & Maureen

Btw - she mentions an attachment in the email - which I couldn't open - just got a blank piece of white paper.

[little miss moffat]

Just received another email from Maureen Child, have copied and pasted comments re schools:

There is a lot going on at present with very major changes, proposals and issues surrounding schools - Castlebrae, Portobello and St John's RC Primary Schools - which will require a lot of local discussion and debate, consultation and deliberation to get the best possible solutions. I am taking a break for a few days from Friday morning(yes, again!) but I will be back well in time for the full Council Meeting on 26 October. The full report on the way forward Portobello High School and St John's does also refer to the opportunities for a new school in Craigmillar. I have seen and commented upon a draft of the report, the final version of which will be available to the public on http://www.edinburgh.gov.uk/cpol by the 20 October. Look out for it.

I am totally committed to doing all I possibly can to help establish excellent new and refurbished schools in the hearts of all our local communities. My very strong preference is still for the 'School in the Park' for Portobello High - a real common good which I firmly believe the vast majority in Portobello and the wider catchment area really do want, even although some are dead set against it and determined that there must have been a reasonable alternative site.

I also want a brand new school in Craigmillar which specialises in science in relation to bioscience and medicine ASAP. And let's remember St John's community will have its own aspirations!

[Mark Cameron]

Kezia Dugdale has confirmed the report has been withdrawn and has apologised.

[wangi]

Btw - she mentions an attachment in the email - which I couldn't open - just got a blank piece of white paper.

It's the raw data captured during the meeting, you can also view it at: phs-public-meeting-20120921-raw-data.xlsx

[David Robertson]

Kezia Dugdale has confirmed the report has been withdrawn and has apologised.

I just received something from Gilmore.

Honestly these people could not run a sponsored walk !

Where now ?

[Porty]

That's not fair David, the meeting was very well run and well intentioned- this is one of the rare occassions where there is total justification for blaming the messenger!

[David Robertson]

That's not fair David, the meeting was very well run and well intentioned- this is one of the rare occassions where there is total justification for blaming the messenger!

Well I am afraid I beg to differ.

I have no doubt with the intention but the method of tables of ten, maps, bits of paper and asking for us to elect someone to record fellings and opinions, laughable.

Then there is the spreadsheet......

Blaming the messenger that may be true but why must they be the messenger ?

[wangi]

Plus:

Dear Parent Council Chair

Further to my email of 2 October, I am writing to confirm that the Education, Children and Families Committee has agreed that we should consult on our proposals to close Castlebrae Community High School.

At the committee meeting it was agreed that the proposals for secondary school catchment areas for children living in the current Castlebrae catchment should be amended and we will now be consulting on the following catchment proposals that would go ahead if Castlebrae closed:


Liberton High School would become the sole non-denominational catchment secondary school for pupils living in the Prestonfield Primary School catchment area; and
Portobello High School would become the sole non-denominational catchment secondary school for pupils living in the Newcraighall, Castleview or Niddrie Mill catchment areas. If at any time in the future, it was not possible to provide spaces in Portobello High School for all pupils living in the new catchment area who wanted to attend the school, placing requests from pupils in the catchment area would be given priority to any other secondary school in the city.

All parents in your school will receive consultation papers on 25 October and these papers will also include information on the four public meetings that will take place for the Castlebrae, Portobello, Liberton and Holy Rood communities.

Yours sincerely

Gillian Tee
Director of Children and Families

Which would mean the following Portobello High School catchment:

...

[Porty]

David - differing is perfectly okay and I will bow to your experience. I wasn't there, was opining on the basis of what many said- up until the summation!!

[Sceptic]

See what I meant about lack of strategic thought re Education in the East of Edinburgh?

When, and if, they get round to rebuilding around Richmond Church, will they consider Education when they submit plans?

There I go being silly again!

[David Robertson]

David - differing is perfectly okay and I will bow to your experience. I wasn't there, was opining on the basis of what many said- up until the summation!!

No problem at all, I did not think I saw you there.

As you know I am very new to this having only got interested after the Court Decision but to my mind Labour - and I use that term carefully - have hi-jacked this process and made the ususal ....... of it.

If they were insistent on this way they should have let everyone see the draft report before submitting it so that it could be changed if required but as usual they jumped in with both feet and now, in my opinion, by withdrawing the already submitted report makes them look weak.

My predicition is labour will all go quiet now and give up...!

[gillian]

Here's what I don't understand, who is actually in the position of saying " right lets go ahead with this line of action, this is the way forward, this is what has to happen next" to get a new PHS
Is it the councillors?, the lawyers? the Education Dept? Are we waiting for one person or a group of people to make a decision? What decision has to be made?
Sorry to be dim, but I have kind of lost the plot, literally!!

[seanie]

Officials are preparing a report for the Council meeting on the 25th. It'll be in the public domain on the 18th. That will set out what options there are for pursuing the school as planned, and alternative sites/strategies, and will make recommendations on what actions to take next. It's for Cllrs to make decisions on that.

[gillian]

Thank you seanie.

[David Robertson]

Officials are preparing a report for the Council meeting on the 25th. It'll be in the public domain on the 18th. That will set out what options there are for pursuing the school as planned, and alternative sites/strategies, and will make recommendations on what actions to take next. It's for Cllrs to make decisions on that.

Thank you.

However unnamaed officials and reports in this regard have yet to be credible, ...... in my opinion !

[seanie]

Having followed this process closely for the last 6 and a half years, I have to say that on the whole I've found that Council officials have handled it pretty well. The consultation on site options back in 2006 was pretty thorough and although there was a bit of a hiatus through 2007-2008 because of finance, from the prioritisation process and selection of PHS as the priority school onwards the project's been handled well. The pre-planning and planning process was very thorough.

[portygeoff]

Cut to the chase Kesia. Private members bill, 6 -9 mths if big Kenny shows his metal and gets the G'ment on board. 2 years to build, new school in under 3 years. Can't see anything quicker. Closest would be be a rebuild on site, plans needed, new place for St John needed, minimum 6 - 8 years if you are lucky.

Plan A on the park via Parliamentary Bill,
Plan B common good disputed in court,
Plan C sell part of park to trust.

[Porty]

Having followed this process closely for the last 6 and a half years, I have to say that on the whole I've found that Council officials have handled it pretty well. The consultation on site options back in 2006 was pretty thorough and although there was a bit of a hiatus through 2007-2008 because of finance, from the prioritisation process and selection of PHS as the priority school onwards the project's been handled well. The pre-planning and planning process was very thorough.

I agree.

[David Robertson]

Cut to the chase Kesia. Private members bill, 6 -9 mths if big Kenny shows his metal and gets the G'ment on board. 2 years to build, new school in under 3 years. Can't see anything quicker. Closest would be be a rebuild on site, plans needed, new place for St John needed, minimum 6 - 8 years if you are lucky.

Plan A on the park via Parliamentary Bill,
Plan B common good disputed in court,
Plan C sell part of park to trust.

I agree

[little miss moffat]

Finance and Resources Committee report on Common Good Annual Performance 2008/09

Common Good Property
3.8 During the year, the review of Portobello Park and Inch Park was completed and Legal Services Division concluded that these sites should be assets of the Common Good.

http://www.scottishcommons.org/docs/fin ... 090825.pdf

[neilking]

Interesting.

It's significant this report is dated August 2009 - i.e. long after the report of January 2008 referenced in the Dorrian judgement in which the Council concluded there were "facts and circumstances" indicating CG and indeed long after November 2008 when the QCs gave their opinion on the basis of taking it as read that the park was CG.

What on earth was one department of the Council doing "completing reviews" of whether the park was CG when other departments had apparently long since concluded it was CG? Right hand, conspiracy, left hand, cock up?

The scottishcommons.org link in LMM's post suggests Andy Wightman's got something to do this as a few years back he was noising up the Council telling them they ought to include lots of extra properties in their list of CG.

On the subject of Andy Wightman, he's now changed his mind on another common good case - Bught Park in Inverness which Highland Council want to appropriate for a by-pass. See http://www.andywightman.com/?p=373#comments. Seems like AW's having a bit of a patchy record where it comes to advising people to "assert" common good.

[Mark Cameron]

Kezia setting her stall out and making it clear the views at the public meeting where firmly behind a build on the park.

http://www.scotsman.com/edinburgh-eveni ... -1-2569317

[David Robertson]

Kezia setting her stall out and making it clear the views at the public meeting where firmly behind a build on the park.

http://www.scotsman.com/edinburgh-eveni ... -1-2569317

Dare I ask the obvious ?

Why not do one or all three ?

And why waste our time and effort by having a Pubic Meeting and then after that meeting submit that reort which was removed after justifiable criticism when all the time they could have been doing any, or all, of the three options now stated ?

Your starter for ten is.....................?

[seanie]

It takes time to evaluate options, get legal advice, look at timescales, costs, risks etc. The report that comes out next week will be the result of that and it will make recommendations to Cllrs on what to do next. The Cllrs will then decide on the 25th.