I am delighted that Trentham High School (THS) has been granted a reprieve from closure. I expressed my sympathy for Trentham Action Group’s well thought out arguments and a hope that Jim Knight would clarify whether 14 schools were possible at the last council meeting during the debate on Cllr Follows’ motion. I’m therefore delighted that the work of Rob Flello in badgering the Minister finally paid off, and that the action group’s tireless, long, and well fought campaign proved to be worth the hard work.
I’m also pleased that the EMB honoured Jim Knight’s wish to keep THS open. However I am also concerned by the specific course of action taken. The school has now been taken out entirely from the BSF scheme meaning it will have no access to funding for renovation and refurbishment. I feel it is seriously amiss to deprive children in any part of the city from this excellent government investment in education – including the attendees of a saved THS. The minister’s letter stated he would accommodate a 14 school BSF proposal with Trentham being the 14th – that is what should have been approved by the EMB. If there is a legal technicality concerning trust schools not being able to receive BSF investment, frankly it is nothing that couldn’t be sorted out by a dialogue with the Department for Children, Schools, and Families.
Further, I think that the knock-on effects of retaining THS for the South and East of the City needs to be fully considered. Pupil numbers for the other schools, as well as the areas they serve, will now all change. Arguably, rather than a quandary this presents an opportunity to perfect the plans to suit all area’s needs.
On the whole, the families that attended the Park Hall consultation (which I have previously blogged about) were broadly happy with academy plans – such as the sponsor etc. The main concern was travel to and from school to that particular gasometer cite. The dissatisfaction at Mitchell and Berryhill Schools should also be ignored at peril.
But as I said, the changes in the proposals are an opportunity. Blurton Acadamy will have capacity for more children from the south part of Longton, which in part addresses the concerns raised at the recent consultation by Dresden parents about the distance they would need to travel to Park Hall. There is also, I believe, scope to look at alternative sites for the Park Hall Academy. So what are the options?
1) The Gasometer Site is Serco’s stated preferred option. I, like many parents am concerned about the safety of access to the site and it could cost a lot to decommission the gasometer. It does have the benefit of being reasonably central to the Longton North and Bentilee communities.
2) Mitchell Site or Wilfield Site: Both sites are a problem for me because of the distance children from my ward would have to travel to school. Wilfield is my preferred of the two but kids would still have to cross Dividy Road by a busy bus depot.
3) My preferred option, and one that needs to be investigated and mooted further is for an Academy on the site of the old Mossfield Colliery. It has the benefit of being equidistant for the Longton North and Bentilee and Berry Hill areas, and has safer access from all sides than the gasometer site. Further the land is already clear and, as I understand, is in council ownership (although this needs to be clarified). The site has potential that should be investigated further.
There will doubtlessly be more twists in the tale of the secondary school reorganisation over the next couple of months. I have two hopes, that the City Council leadership will have a more vigorous dialogue with the Government and public going forward and that we will start to see construction workers as soon as possible.