Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement

 
 
Saturday, 22nd November 2008 Change Date

Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.

Options

Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the Edinburgh Evening News site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

To read this article in full you must be registered with the site.

Pupil numbers halved at closure-threatened schools



Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 26 August 2008
THE number of pupils attending two under-threat city primaries has halved since it emerged they both face closure by Christmas.
Dozens of anxious parents have removed their children from Bonnington and Lismore primaries since the council unveiled its plans in June.

Bonnington, in Leith, has lost more than half its pupils, with its roll falling from 80 at the start of the s
ummer to just 32 now.

Only two new primary one pupils joined the school after the summer break.

Lismore Primary in Bingham has lost nearly half of its pupils, with its roll going from 88 before the summer to 48.

Westburn Primary in Sighthill is the third school on the closure hit-list but it has been largely unaffected by the threat as the school is not recommended for closure until next August.

Parents have accused the council of purposely creating an exodus from the under-threat schools to help their case for closure.

Stewart Muir, who used to co-chair Bonnington's parent council, decided at the end of June to remove his son Brandon from the school because of the uncertainty over its future.

He said: "It's basically inevitable that the school will close given that the school roll is 32.

"This is what they have been trying to get all along.

"Practically all the P7s turned out for their final year but most of the pupils in the other classes have found somewhere else. It's a real shame, not just for Bonnington, but for all the schools that are up for closure."

Gail Ross, of Lismore Parents Action Group, said the council would use the low roll as evidence that Lismore should close.

She said: "This is the education department's fault. Edinburgh City Council has made a conscious decision to scaremonger so that this would happen.

"Parents have been frightened off by all the rumours and they will see the school roll has dramatically fallen and use it against us.

"The parents all said that they didn't want to take the children out the school and would come back if they were given something concrete.

"

The proposals on all three schools are now out to public consultation and a final decision will be taken in November.

A series of public exhibitions and meetings will take place over the coming weeks for parents to have their say on the proposals.

Parents of children at Westburn Primary are already gearing up for a fight and have organised their own meeting for September 3.

David Corcoran, a member of the parents group fighting plans to close Westburn, said: "The parents are quite strong and want to stand up against these plans.

"I'm quite pleased to say that parents are sticking by the school."

A council spokeswoman said: "Where there are places available, parents are free to choose where they send their children to school.

"We appreciate that this is a difficult time but no decisions have been taken regarding these proposals. The situation regarding the pupil numbers is currently being assessed at the schools."





The full article contains 513 words and appears in Edinburgh Evening News newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

 
1

druidh,

edinburgh 26/08/2008 12:20:47
If all the kids who would have joined have found places elsewhere, does that not prove there are too many schools?
2

Linmal,

Livingston 26/08/2008 12:22:08
Its all a matter of common sense really. If there aren't sufficient pupils to warrant the school being kept open then it should close. If the Council were to carry on with this it would be a blatant waste of Council Tax money and no doubt there would be a stooshie about that. The Council are in a no win situation here whatever they do.

Of course it is sad to see an old-established school like Bonnington Primary going under but if there aren't enough children in the catchment area it is inevitable. There are other schools in the area, Broughton Primary being the most obvious. And Broughton has had a good reputation in the past. I was lucky enough to go there and to Broughton Secondary as it was then, so don't really see the problem.
3

Bob 2,

26/08/2008 12:22:38
think they had lost the argument before the closures were announced

look at the averages

Lismore 12.5 kids per year

Bonnington 12.4 kids per year

any primary school would like averages like this
4

Bob 2,

26/08/2008 12:25:44
question would be , before the closures were announced

how many parents sent there kids from these areas to schools outwith the area of bonnington and lismore?

don't just blame the Council, part of the blame should be "pointed" at the parents who have chosen not to use their Local Primary school, for what ever reason
5

The Baker,

26/08/2008 12:41:02
Lismore = 18+ staff

pupils = 48

surely they are producing really smart kids with that ratio.
6

KV,

26/08/2008 12:44:30
A problem the council is currently pretending doesn't exist is that there aren't rooms in all the other schools in the area for 2 or more children from the same family. If you have a P1 and a P3, you can't possibly pick one up from Leith primary and one from Broughton at the same time. Until the council can ensure that children from the same family can be placed in the same school, closing schools at Christmas will only cause unnecessary hardship to families
7

Linmal,

Livingston 26/08/2008 13:22:13
#6 Obviously children from the same family would ideally attend the same school. There are no easy answers here, but they have to be found as it is just plain crazy to continue a facility with so few children.
8

The Geniune Mario Antionette,

26/08/2008 14:11:08
this justifies the decision to close them. If the parents have no will & so readily jump ship, shows just how much they really care, eh
9

The Geniune Mario Antionette,

26/08/2008 14:11:23
I blame the parents
10

The Geniune Mario Antionette,

26/08/2008 14:11:59
So do I - & so does Sellotape
11

Burning badger,

Edinburgh 26/08/2008 14:22:01
Few of the comments on here cut to the heart of the matter, and that is whether these are the right schools to close. My son attends the nursery at Bonnington, and I have to say it is a superb little school - ethnically diverse, aspirationally challenging, and concerned about the local community, and the environment. The teaching staff are excellent, and it is a shame that the Council hasn't considered these things when selecting its shortlist for the chop. If parents locally aren't choosing to send their kids there, the questions should be why, and what can be done to improve things? To say there aren't enough children in the catchment area is absolute rubbish - and there are new houses going up all the time on all sides in Bonnington - just look at the new developments opposite Powderhall. The REAL reason the council has picked these schools is because they will realise maximum cash when flogged off to greedy developers, who have been hanging around in the wings for years. Parents, the media and politicians should be pushing the council on yet another case of flogging off the family silver - is it a coincidence that a beautiful Victorian schoolhouse on Bonnington Road is being sold off instead of a ramshackle old 1940s-built building in the heart of one of the city's most deprived areas (Fort)? I think not. I also agree that those parents who have moved their kids elsewhere should have stood firm (especially the so-called convenor of the parents group), instead of jumping ship to beat the rush. The proposal to close the school at Christmas was a cynical move by the Council, and just shows that it can achieve its nefarious, money-grubbing schemes by whatever means it sees fit, without a care for the children affected. And the residents of Bonnington, instead of a super school that has stood for more than 100 years, will get instead... another nice new luxury flatted development, which will just help drive down the relative value of their own houses. Way to go.
12

Linmal,

Livingston 26/08/2008 14:37:16
#11 Again I say it is regrettable but inevitable. If there are not enough pupils I do not see what else the Council can do. As for houses being built at Powderhall, the nearest school to them would surely be Broughton? I am a former Broughtonian and I would be sad to see my old school closed, so I sympathise with others to whom this will happen. The fact of the matter is it is just plain economic sense and for once the Council are taking their stewardship of Council Tax payers' money seriously.
13

JeB,

the city 26/08/2008 15:04:34
Everyone whines about how much money the Council wastes, then complains when the Council tries to save money by closing under-used facilities. I agree wholeheartedly with #12 - when there is no economic benefit to keeping some schools open, when in fact they are costing more money because they are not at capacity, it only makes sense to close them down. And if there is sufficient capacity in other schools where is the problem, kids are not losing out on an Education, they simply have to go a little further to get that education.
14

Burning badger,

Edinburgh 26/08/2008 15:07:03
I don't agree that this is sound stewardship of council taxpayers' money seriously; it is the result of a massive financial black hole in the council budget, partly owing to the previous administrations' mismanagement; party due to the fact that education has been lumped in with social services, and Shrubhill has already been flogged off to raise cash. If you think selling the Bonnington estate for what the council is estimating would be £1.4 million at a time when the economy and the housing market is depressed, and hand the consequences to the schoolchildren there, as well as future generations, then I cannot agree. What happens when the black hole is not filled? The council begins casting its eye about for the next most lucrative bit of real estate in its portfolio. If you think of Council Tax income as an annual salary, then the council's property portfolio is its savings account, and the investment is not just monetary. I applaud prudent fiscal management, but I cannot say that this is evidence of that. The Bonnington school role was relatively healthy last year, even despite the almost continual threat of closure. Now that school role has artificially been hacked in half; can we really call that social justice? The council should be investing in this city; its people, schools, services and infrastructure. If that means a small rise in coucil tax - or even a whole new, fairer form of taxation - then so be it. At the moment the council is acting - like most other UK corporate bodies right now - more like a slum landlord than a democratically elected group of officials with the best interests of the city at heart. This scheme to close schools has been cynically conducted, and the real issues at its heart have not been disclosed by the councillors responsible. When set against the monumental wastes of money this administration and the last have presided over: £100,000 city-wide "tree surveys"; proposed restoration of the mayoral robes; subsidised staff lunches; a
15

Burning badger,

Edinburgh 26/08/2008 15:12:04
Ha ha! I ranted so much I ran out of space. Ah well, it's unlikely my calls for greater social justice will make much difference on here anyway!
16

Linmal,

Livingston 26/08/2008 15:21:10
#14/15 Social injustice? I don't think so. It is a case of supply and demand and there isn't enough demand in that particular area. Simple as that. And what school did you go to? It is the Bonnington School roll not "role" - look up your dictionary! And before you make any other comments, spelling is important because if it is spelt incorrectly it is wrong, simple as. (On second thoughts I wouldn't say which school I went to as it would embarrass them).
17

Linmal,

Livingston 26/08/2008 15:35:40
#14/15 Even if, as you say, it has been "hacked in half", even before this happened it had a very low roll and probably wasn't viable even then.
18

Burning badger,

Edinburgh 26/08/2008 16:35:37
I consider the council making cuts without proper consultation and in the manner it has as social injustice. The school in question at Bonnington, and the others besides, play an important role (not roll) in the area, and the roll (not role) was more than 80 pupils last year alone, with 30 more in nursery classes and ready to advance had the axe not threatened to fall. Why must the Council close the school by Christmas, announcing in the last few weeks of the spring term that the school was under threat of closure, if not as a calculated move to drive down attendance for the forthcoming year? Why is the figure given as the estimated value of the school estate as low as £1.4 million, which seems a serious undervaluation? I don't know how you like your councillors to carry on out there in West Lothian, but I would prefer the ones I vote for to give a damn about the service they provide, not just the balance sheet. Why should schools close at all? Contrary to your postulations, there IS a demand for a school in the Bonnington area - but it has been artificially suppressed. If the school is perceived to be failing, whose fault is that, and on what criteria is it judged to be so? If a school is failing, is it now acceptable just to close it? And none of this is social injustice in your world, is it? Maybe in the lawless badlands of West Lothian, but not here matey. And FYI I went to both a primary school and secondary school that were seriously threatened with closure; the pupils, parents and local community stood together and staved off such closures, and in both cases the schools went on to win national attainment awards, and are still going strong, with healthy rolls, to this day. Had the short-termists got their way, those schools would have gone forever, never to be replaced. I am not in favour of retaining schools for merely nostalgic reasons, I just don't believe all the avenues have been explored in this case, and the "consultation period" has been queered by the
19

Linmal,

Livingston 26/08/2008 16:46:06
#18 You don't half like getting the last word - and what a lot of them (words that is). I would think that the school is failing because parents are not sending their children there any more for whatever reason. We have had our share of school closures and rationalisation in West Lothian. Am not so up on it these days since I no longer have school age children. However, economic sense means that you can't continue to keep something going when there are more teachers than there are pupils. Not quite at that level yet, but it was getting there by the looks of it.

Accept it, there are a few other schools in the area and they will do a good job I am sure.
20

Linmal,

Livingston 26/08/2008 16:48:04
#18 - How can you justify keeping a city school open with a roll of 32?

Sorry, it just doesn't make sense when the resources could be put to better use elsewhere.
21

Burning badger,

Edinburgh 26/08/2008 17:14:41
You don't seem to get my point; the school's roll would have been much higher had there been no threat of closure at Christmas this year. Last year it was 84, with 30-plus in nursery, that is an effective total roll of 120-odd children, this despite Bonnington being one of a number of schools earmarked for closure in the Council's earlier proposals. That is what I am angry about - this school had by no means the lowest roll in the area, yet was earmarked for closure purely because it occupies the most readily saleable building out of the three or four others that are mentioned as being in the catchment. If the council felt that five would have to go into four, it should have opened proper and transparent consultations at the appropriate time, with all five schools in the area involved. That parents were not privy to this selection process frankly smacks of anti-democratic practice. That cannot be justified or defended on any level, no matter how blinkered your arguments. If proper consultation had taken place, then I would find the arguments the council is hiding behind much easier to swallow. It didn't, so I won't. I would do the same if any other school in the area had been threatened with closure on such flimsy and arbitrary grounds, including Broughton. Of course, the council knows the only way to get what it wants, is to divide and conquer, and hope that nimbyism prevails. Which it looks like doing. I agree, parents who have moved their kids have to shoulder some of the blame. But not that this move was inevitable when the council started dreaming it up at Easter (or earlier, according to the teaching staff at Bonnington). Sadly, you are right, with a roll of just 32, the move looks like a fait accompli. Well done the council, trebles all round...
22

Bob 2,

26/08/2008 23:34:01
Its sad to see a Local Primary School Close,

for get about what the ground is worth

again look at the averages, in the ideal world every School and PARENT would like an average of 12 per school year

But this is the real world, think they had lost the argument before the closures were announced

look at the averages

Lismore 12.5 kids per year

Bonnington 12.4 kids per year

any primary school would like averages like this

question would be , before the closures were announced

how many parents sent there kids from these areas to schools outwith the area of bonnington and lismore?

don't just blame the Council, part of the blame should be "pointed" at the parents who have chosen not to use their Local Primary school, for what ever reason

Maybe Burning Badger could ask the Council under the Freedom of Information act the answer to the above question.

But the reality is before the announcements, THE SCHOOL ROLLs were LOW.

Blame the parents before and after the announcement who DO NOT send their kids to THEIR LOCAL SCHOOL, thats one of the reasons that the schools are being ear marked for closure
23

Bob 2,

26/08/2008 23:35:16
Burning Badger a wee tip split your comments up into paragraphs, you'll find people will read your comments
24

Linmal,

Livingston 27/08/2008 10:35:35
#21 As an aside, one of my friends was a teacher at Bonnington Primary about 30 years ago. She loved it and I am sad to see it close but am being realistic. I would be the same about my beloved Broughton, but would understand if it was under capacity. When these victorian schools were built it was nothing for children to come from a family of 8 or even more, those days are long gone and therefore it doesn't make sense to have so many local schools. Most of them are within walking distance or a short bus ride, Edinburgh is not such a huge place in terms of getting about so it is sad but inevitable that the schools will have to be spaced further apart than of old.
25

Casey Beer,

29/08/2008 10:57:44
#15 "Ah well, it's unlikely my calls for greater social justice will make much difference on here anyway!"

Burning Badger, I wish some highly prolific posters on here were as perceptive as you.

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 

Featured Advertising



Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.