Will be happy to help if no one has replied yet!

Let me know.

Regards,

Nathalie

Do you have any ideas whom should be contacted.
Thanks, David

1. From Andrew Burns, labour councillor

Hello

I’m sure you’ll have heard by now that the Lib-Dem/SNP Administration budget was passed, and our alternative Labour Group Budget defeated. I can confirm that we did manage to get the Conservatives and the Greens to back our general proposals (with a few minor amendments) and this pushed the vote to 29/29 with the Lord Provost having to use his casting vote to ensure the Administration Budget was actually approved.

I am sorry not to be able to bring better news.

Some further, brief details can be found on my blog (and the links therein):

http://andrewburns.blogspot.com/2011/02/budget-approved.html

- and my colleague, Ricky Henderson (our Finance Spokesperson) had a short piece in Saturday’s Evening News which summarised the approach we had taken:

http://edinburghnews.scotsman.com/opinion/Ricky-Henderson-It39s-about-defining.6716863.jp

I hope this brief update is of some help, but please don’t hesitate to get back to me if you want any further information/clarification …

… and many thanks for taking the time to get in touch with me in the run-up to the setting of the Local Authority Budget last week.

Andrew

P.S. please do feel free to pass on this message to other colleagues.
____________

Andrew Burns
Labour Councillor for Fountainbridge/Craiglockhart Ward
Leader, Labour Group, City of Edinburgh Council

2. From: Marilyne MacLaren [mailto:Marilyne.MacLaren@edinburgh.gov.uk]
Sent: 18 February 2011 13:52
To: cathy.higginson@btopenworld.com
Subject: Changes to Janitorial arrangements

Dear Dr Higginson,

As I know you have written concerned about the above, I have to tell you that this was a decision agreed by Council on Budget Day 10 February 2011.

For a number of years there has been an acknowledgement that the Janitorial Service requires reviewing. For instance, it cannot be sensible that because of split shifts, a janitor is away from work for 4 hours in the middle of the day in a primary school, or that we have to pay overtime rates for a Janitor to work in the evenings or weekends in our Secondary Schools. Can I reassure you it is not our intention to take away the services of a much appreciated Janitor from particular schools. However it is the case that we do believe that especially in small schools which are reasonably close, there might well be some sense in sharing resources.

Discussions on the model to be used are ongoing with the Janitors themselves, and the trade unions and already useful suggestions have been put forward. The feedback from Head Teachers will also be crucial in shaping the final proposals.

Yours sincerely

Councillor Marilyn MacLaren

Convenor of Education, Children and Families

Thanks

Derek Nelson

Dear Ms Kist

Thank you again for your email.

As you may be aware primary school budgets in Edinburgh are primarily a matter for the City of Edinburgh Council who are in charge of dividing up the funding allocated to them by the Scottish Government and therefore individual MSPs have no say in how funding is allocated.

However having spoken to the the City of Edinburgh Council Education Convenor Marilyne MacLaren and several other local Liberal Democrat Councillors at length about this issue I have been reassured no final decision about the allocation of primary school funding has been made and that everything possible is being done to ensure that any cut to school budgets is as low as possible.

I attach a response that I have received from Education Convenor Marilyne MacLaren regarding the current City of Edinburgh Council position on the matter for your information.

Yours sincerely
Mike Pringle
Mike Pringle MSP
Member for Edinburgh South (Liberal Democrat)

Dear Mrs O’Neill

Thank you for your email. Please be assured of my support. The Green
Group of Councillors agree that the current embedded cut of 1.5% has
already had a detrimental impact and that further cuts will be very
damaging, leading to increased requirement for management staff covering
staff shortages, to a lack of basic resources like text books and
jotters, and an inability to pay for basic maintenance tasks.

Budget proposals that lead to a reduction in Learning Assistants are
quite clearly unacceptable. The impact on the children who require
additional support is incalculable. Any short term savings will be
negated by the finance required to put things right at a later date.
Drama, music and physical education may be cut if these proposals are
put in place. These subjects are an important part of a well-rounded
curriculum and such proposals are entirely at odds with the aims of the
Curriculum for Excellence.

You won’t be surprised to learn that I am receiving a great deal of
correspondence on this issue from concerned parents. It is very
important that parents contact their local Councillors and make them
aware of the impact these proposals would have on local schools and ask
them to vote to protect school budgets on 11th February. Councillor
Marilyne MacLaren, Convenor of Education, is also one of your local
Councillors. It is important that parents ensure their views reach
Councillor MacLaren who is a member of the ruling Lib Dem/SNP
administration in the city.

Please don’t hesitate to get in touch if I can help in any way,

Regards

Alison

Alison Johnstone
Green Councillor for Meadows and Morningside City

Dear Mr & Mrs O’Neill

I will do all I can within my group to ensure that our budget protects
frontline services like Education and avoids the deep cuts being
proposed by the department.

Kind regards,

Mark
Councillor Mark McInnes

Dear Mr and Mrs O’Neill,

Thank you for contacting me regarding the very difficult budget situation in which we find ourselves. Over the last 2 years, and again this year, we have faced difficult circumstances, not of our making, which required us to make painful choices. I did not come into politics to administer budget cuts but we took these decisions to protect the core of the services for the future. It is a tribute to the staff, pupils and parents that, even in these difficult times, the Education service has continued to improve.

This year a cut in the funding we expected to receive from Westminster via the Scottish Government, the extra costs of PPP schools which the last Administration failed to provide for and the increasing numbers of looked after children and children with complex special needs have left the Children and Families Department £13.7 million short of where we need to be.

There is no way that this level of cut can be achieved through the traditional ‘efficiency savings’ approach which is why we are working with teachers and parents to find ways which protects schools and services to vulnerable young people as much as possible. All areas will be looked at to make a contribution however no decision on the recommendations before us will be made until the Council Budget meeting.

Once again, thank you for taking the time to contact me. Please be assured we will make every effort to protect core Education services and strive to ensure the service has the funding required to continue to deliver high quality education in future years.

Yours sincerely,

Councillor Marilyne MacLaren

I have spoken directly a number of the local Parent Councils. I have also received a briefing document from the Edinburgh Parent Council Network, which sets out the impact of the proposed cuts and agree totally with the thrust of this document. While I have no doubt that there is efficiencies to be found within the Education Department I do not believe that devolved school budgets are where the Lib Dem/SNP administration should be looking for these. I feel that there has been a sustained attack on education over the last few years with budgets being reduced and schools being closed. This is in contrast to 34 new or refurbished Edinburgh schools and £300m invested in 8 years under the previous Labour administration.
The potential damage to the education we provide to our children is very significant if such cuts were to be implemented by the current administration. Myself and my colleagues in the Labour Group are firmly of the belief that front line services should be protected as much as possible and we are yet to be convinced that these funding cuts are absolutely necessary. The Council’s revenue budget allocation from the Scottish Government next year will be £810.885m, an increase of more than £14m (1.76%) from this year, however it will undoubtedly start to fall after that.

As you may be aware the Council’s budget will be set on 11 February. In the weeks ahead we shall be focussing on putting together alternative budget proposals that recognise the crucial importance of front line services like education and particularly school based budgets while making any savings that must be made from the bureaucracy that exists within the Council.

Many thanks again for contacting me about this, please get in touch if I can be of further assistance.

Regards,

Paul

Cllr Paul Godzik

Dear Ms Kist

Budget Cuts

Thank you for contacting me regarding the very difficult budget situation in which we find ourselves. Over the last 2 years, and again this year, we have faced difficult circumstances, not of our making, which required us to make painful choices. I did not come into politics to administer budget cuts but we took these decisions to protect the core of the services for the future. It is a tribute to the staff, pupils and parents that, even in these difficult times, the Education service has continued to improve.

This year a cut in the funding we expected to receive from Westminster via the Scottish Government, the extra costs of PPP schools which the last Administration failed to provide for and the increasing numbers of looked after children and children with complex special needs have left the Children and Families Department £13.7 million short of where we need to be.

There is no way that this level of cut can be achieved through the traditional ‘efficiency savings’ approach which is why we are working with teachers and parents to find ways which protects schools and services to vulnerable young people as much as possible. All areas will be looked at to make a contribution however no decision on the recommendations before us will be made until the Council Budget meeting.

Once again, thank you for taking the time to contact me. Please be assured we will make every effort to protect core Education services and strive to ensure the service has the funding required to continue to deliver high quality education in future years.

Yours sincerely,

Councillor Jim Lowrie

Dear Mrs Kist

Thank you for your recent email. I am concerned about the impact that potential cuts could have on our schools. The Conservative Group is currently reviewing the budget for 2010 as part of our budget proposals and the views from Parent Councils are being viewed to help us develop a budget that is fair and delivers for our most vital services.

Just now I understand that the cuts are just proposals from the Lib Dem / SNP administration and will I be keeping a close eye on if these proposals do come to fruition.

Kind regards

Gordon

Councillor Gordon Buchan
Scottish Conservative Councillor for Fountainbridge / Craiglockhart Ward

I have emailed Seonag MacKinnon at the BBC to complain about the piece and I think Martin is right to suggest that the C&F Department would have planted the seed. But I also have to question the judgement of headteachers. Perhaps Rory McKenzie at Balerno CHS (the quoted headteacher) is simply naïve at how to deal with media. Other than that, he is pushing a one-dimensional line that he must know cannot command consensus with parents – just at a time when there is much talk, quite rightly, about how we can make common cause with headteachers: for example, this Wednesday?s meeting. If headteachers (or at least some of them) are going to be as naïve and simplistic about budget cuts (providing cover for the inept school closures process to date) then it is going to be difficult to find common ground.

I spoke to my own head-teacher this morning about this and he was aghast at the view cited by the BBC that Edinburgh’s headteachers unanimously support more closures. He said that this was quite simply not the case. Perhaps we should each ask our own headteachers about this and ask them to raise it with their respective associations.

The other thing that really hacked me off about the BBC piece ? apart from the wearisome repetition of the council?s discredited capacity measurements ? is the way that parents? views are always described as ?emotive?. The council does this all the time too and the implication, of course, is that the City Council and the professionals have a monopoly on ?rationality?. How patronizing! As we all know, parents ? on all sides of the school closures argument ? are perfectly able to conduct that on rational grounds and that is what I tried to reflect in section 6 of the EPCN report. We might not have united views on closures, but we are, I am sure, united in the view that is needs to thorough and rational. On this evidence it is the headteachers and journalists who need to get a bit more nous.

Was this really a necessary, proportionate move? I would say not.

Snowballs all round for them in charge!

I have no expectation that 3rd or 4th place will make a difference unless we can accelerate the capital spend. Neither will actually happen.

Mike

Here’s the latest news:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/edinburgh_and_east/7776079.stm

Boroughmuir 3rd behind Portobello and Gillespies – if passed at the meeting on the 18th.

Unlike many websites, once your identity has been established your comments to this site are published without “moderation”. However, the terms of use of the site do require us to remove content that is considered offensive by any staff or parent/carer.

I hope we can continue this important dialog without it escalating to the point where moderation is required.

Mike

You should lobby Marilyn MacLean before the meeting on the 18th December as to your opinions on a decant, refurb etc. She herself is not involved the decision making process but can lobby on your behalf:-

Marilyne.MacLaren@edinburgh.gov.uk
Councillor Marilyne MacLaren
City of Edinburgh Council
City Chambers
High Street
Edinburgh
EH1 1YJ

0131 529 3294

I attended a talk in Morningside last week about the future of secondary education in Edinburgh by Councillor MacLaren where she stated of the 5 schools in Wave3 there is only a possibility of ONE being rebuilt unless more money is provided by central government. The decision on which school this will be will be made on the 18th. My guess is Boroughmuir is not top of the list.

More money is being made available (apparently) but there is a fight between Central Govt. and the local councils as to what the money is used for. Central govt. say spend on schools, council’s say it’s not for the govt. to dictate where the money should be spent. Ho hum more prevarication I feel.

http://edinburghnews.scotsman.com/latestnews/Fast-forward-for-schoolfunds.4737146.jp

BTW: I fully support the state system hence my interest.

If your childrens’ ‘one chance’ at secondary education is so important as to make you insult people, why are your kids in the state school system? Lucas was merely referring to the need to make a wise decision about the buildings, with the long term future and the amenity for all effected communities in mind: just as the Victorian builders of these schools did. Council has long had its head in the sand about population growth and its duty to the actual fabric of the city as wel as the social fabric.

Chronic lack of maintenance is not something we can hold the Victorians accountable for, but like it or not it needs to be dealt with. They thought of the education of children in the future, so Lucas raising this issue is part of responsible debate, as was my grouse about BOTH surveys being flawed.

However, this debate does sway me: a total decant is the most sensible option, or at least a third way between a building site education on the one hand and an enivronmental and possibly social disaster on the other.

Question is, where to, and to whom should we make this plea?

I’ve been in IT for about 20 years and my wife, Sarah, is/was (?) the ICT coordinator at another Edinburgh school. So, I might be able to help out too. I’m certainly interested in the whole ICT curriculum subject.

Cheers,
Sam

PS I know what all your acronyms mean.

P.S. I’m one of the organisers of The Badminton Club and my little one, Lachlan Stephen, is in P4A.

I am not prepared for my children’s education to be sacrificed for the greater good. My kids will have one chance at Secondary school education and one only and I find it unacceptable for that chance to be adversely affected by being educated on a building site. That is why I am opposed to redevelopment at Viewforth.

If you think the refurbishment is going to start soon without the new “Scottish Futures Trust” being in place (replacement for PFI) and without the 3 years of planning then I am afraid you are deluded. Either option (refurbishment or new build) is 3 to 4 years away (2011/12) from a spade hitting the ground anywhere. Then a further 2-4 years away from being the build being completed (2015/2016) depending on the options taken.

I have a P4 and a pre-school child so feel it is acceptable to have this view!

The “Key Facts” section are not FACTS but opinion at best. For example the cost section for the Scottish Water site is under negotiation at the moment so 60-80 Million is a guess by the author of the leaflet. Longevity is also speculation and who is to the say the new build parts of the school if the refurbishment was to go ahead would last >30 years either? Also the Build as agreed by the architect in favour of refurbishment admitted that the whole process would take 7 years with either option.

So “key facts” should have been titled “Best Guess”

Other parts of this doc were also incorrect

“The Fairmilehead option will take longer in the pre-construction phase..” This was debunked at the meeting in Sth. Morningside on 6th Nov. as all parties agreed 7 year timetable was realistic for either option of which the pre-construction phase would take 3 years.

This should be about what is best for the pupils, my opinion is that if the WHOLE school can be decanted to another location for the duration of the whole build then yes a refurb is possible. If not I would not want my children to be educated in a building site for 4 years (as per the project plan) distributed at the meeting. Also 4 years, whose ever heard of a build coming in on time!

Currently only 300 pupils can be decanted at one time (Darroch Annex), that’s only 25% of the school).BTW James Gillespies is operating at >100% occupancy now therefore the options to decant some to JG is unlikely.

Another doubtful statement was if a complete decant was undertaken that the building work would take 18 months – from the project plan I am unsure of the source of the estimate.

I would urge people not to underestimate the disruption caused whilst the construction of a 5 storey school block is undertaken at the gable end of the tenement block. Also all this assumes that planning permission is granted.

The council representative at the Sth. Morningside meeting stressed that the council is open to either option and is not trying to impose one option or the other and will listen to parents.

All I’m trying to say is look at this from a pragmatic point of view and judge, based on facts, what will be best for your kids schooling in the long run.

Thanks for your hard work in keeping us up to date about this issue.

Jeanna is, I believe, seeing some email although she is on Holiday. Both private and public comment (above) are being received. The best way to keep all the threads in one place is to continue to comment on this post. You will need your login details.

I posted recently to explain how to get them. If your comment does not appear immediately it is because first-time posters are held for “moderation” just in case they offer dubious potions or dodgy nigerian oil money. I will release your comment from moderation ASAP, but I am travelling tomorrow so I will have limited access.

Mike Norman

Thanks very much for sending this well-worded letter. I was going to contact you to raise exactly some of these concerns. Andrew & I were both pretty shocked at the shoddy form of “consultation” the document affords — technical terms not defined, maps not to the same scale or detail, concerns about the B’stone site that have been repeatedly articulated not included… that sort of thing. Aside from being anti-democratic for the reasons you outline in your letter, it’s pretty insulting to our intelligence (that’s the mood in our house anyway).

What are we advised to do at the moment, though? Should we (i) send back the “consultation” forms blank/completed as best we can, but with our objection to the form they take written into the comments box at the end, or (ii) wait to see if this mock consultation gets recalled and the job is done properly?

Y’a encore des tickets pour Samedi? Il me faut au moins 4.

Fin (Zazou’s Ma)