Tuesday, 4 November 2008

BREAKING NEWS: TRENTHAM HIGH TO CLOSE - FINAL!

The fight to save Trentham High School has failed!
Minister for schools Jim Knight today announced to a Westminster Hall Debate, called by Stoke South MP Rob Flello, that he had approved the City Council's Secondary School Proposal yesterday.
Mr Knight dismissed out of hand the excellent arguments put forward by Mr Flello about the need to keep open the second best high school in the city.

Indeed, Mr Knight also said that he was becoming more impatient to get on with the proposal in the interests of all the children of the city.

Mr Flello (pictured right) was accompanied by Stoke Central MP Mark Fisher put passionate reasons to keep Trentham open and both MP's were very critical of the role of SERCO in this re-organisation.

Mr Fisher implored Mr Knight to delay his decision further to allow discussions about reaching a compromise and a better solution to the issues in our City. It was clear to anyone watching the debate that there would be no further concessions and that he was keen to proceed with the BSF proccess without any further delay.

Both local MP's highlighted the tremendous work done at both the closing schools by the current head teachers Jan Webber of Longton and Sue Chesterton of Trentham.

It seem that this is the end of the road for the TAG who have fought a courageous battle to save their school, but there can be no doubt that Mr Knight is fully behind the Council's decision to close Trentham High and that he believes that a new Academy on Blurton is a better prospect for all the children of the area.

I have no doubt that Nicky will blog on this at some stage and it will be interesting whether she and other members of the TAG will accept this decision now or carry on with their fight.

I wonder when they will realise that to carry on fighting in the wake of the statement by Jim Knight will be like flogging a dead horse.

It seems like the final nail in the coffin of Trentham High.
As much as I don't agree with the closure of this popular and well performing school there will be no final reprieve.
Read the Sentinel story Here

55 comments:

Anonymous said...

Hooooraaaaaay!

Anonymous said...

I have been following this issue since the beginning and I can say the i'm glad that Trentham is closing! Never before have I come across such a bunch of elitist tossers! As a person who lives in Blurton I say this you reap what you sow!

Alan

Anonymous said...

TAG members - you have fought a good fight and made your case but this is the end of the line. Some you win, some you don't. You did all that you could and now is the time to move on with your lives.

Karl said...

I can hear that Fat Lady...... Move on. Blurton welcomes you and your KIDS!

Anonymous said...

Sorry folks, the fight has just stepped up a level. No, the TAG will not stop its fight to keep its high school.

You'll just have to save your celebrations until later!

Karl said...

Anon, A final decision has now been made by a GOVERNMENT MINISTER! Just where the hell can you go now? The courts? Have you ever known a GOVERNMENT decision to be overturned by a court? Come on now accept the fact that Trentham High will close, for the good of your kids!

Shaun Bennett said...

Its a very sad day not only for Trentham but for the whole city. I really do believe that this could be the final nail in our city's coffin. Why on earth will young up and coming families now want to live within the city boundaries at all? We may well find that those families will be sending their children to schools outside the city in the not too distant future. That will break their links to the city and they will take their skills with them.

I say this to anonymous and those others who have expressed their delight at the collapse of our education system; if those families move out of the Trentham area you won't have a cash cow anymore to subsidise the rest of the city. What are we going to do then?

brooneyes said...

I consider what our MP's have done
to be too little, too late! I consider what Meredith has done to this city to be far too damaging to allow the little fascist b*****d
away with, and I consider the
outsourcing of problems like education, the last thing you want to do.
Trentham High should not close and be merged with Blurton because that is the worst outcome for the kids and their education! Schools should exist within the local communities, Meredith and Labour know this, yet still they push for these monolith schools that are the worst possible option of all.
Money makes them the expedient choice, that and Labours maniacal drive for forced social cohesion.
Education just became secondary to Labours social experiments, and the bloody idiots who made the stupid comments on here should try considering the state of education in their area, rather than taking the mick out of Trentham. This is as bad for Blurton as it is for Trentham, but try not to forget that these aren't the only places being forced to take academies. In the north of the city, both James Brindley High and Brownhills are to be treated to this abuse as well.

nita said...

The whole BSF Programme has caused much controversy.

It seems, that this is the end of the road, as Jim Knight has now signed off the plans.

Each of the closing schools, have served their communities well, and many are improving, year after year, especially Trentham High. I say, schools are improving, but some are still not upto national level, and the kids of the city deserve better.

The BSF is not about individual schools, it is there to ensure every child across the city gets the best education. We may not like some of the decisions, but I personally feel it is time to move on.

I fully understand, the Trentham/Hanford residents argument, that they already have a school that is performing well, so why close it. I agree, it doesn't make any sense. They have put up a good fight, and have done their very best, so they must be totally deflated. Having said that, we are forgetting how well Blurton has been doing. So, is it really a bad thing, to combine the two together?

I am not totally convinced that Academies are the way forward, as no one can say for definite that they will improve education. There is no concrete evidence.

Time will tell. We have to hope that those that have made these decision have got it right.

nicky said...

Tony, it is not final and I will not believe your propaganda. We will take it to court. TAG have most certainly not given up, we will fight on. And I am speaking for TAG for once, because we have talked about it today, nobody in TAG that I have spoken with this afternoon has suggested we should give up. THE FIGHT GOES ON!

the judge said...

The only person sighing with relief is Robert Flello.
He's looked the fighting MP fighting for his lot but we all know he's the Government's gob in Stoke.
He's delivered BSF for Knight and fooled a few in the South.
Shithouse.

Gary Elsby said...

Nicky, the Government of the day, whichever day and Government of political choice, often loses Court case brought against it on a legal footing.

Good luck to you from me and my mates in Labour.

terry turbo said...

Labour have been in the driving seat and will not give in like any dictator.
Meredith and his freinds have a lot to answer for.
Gary, "good luck to you from me and my mates in Labour" is that your attempt at sarcasm.
Labour is the modern day equivilent of Stalinism, with there policy of "we know best" while their lists of failures grow.

Joseph Stalin said...

The BNP have been in the driving seat and will not give in, like any dictator.
Albino Alby and his friends have a lot to answer for.
Terry, "Labour is the modern day equivalent of Stalinism" is that your attempt at sarcasm.
The BNP is the modern day equivalent of Fascism, with their policy of "WHITES ONLY" while their lists of failures grow!

Anonymous said...

Has Peter Kent-Baguley joined us above?

Joseph Stalin (PKB) said...

Oh, no, I've been rumbled!

Tony said...

Nicky, What the hell are you on about, "my propaganda"? All I have done is to blog an accurate account of today's debate and then pose some questions, which I thought was the reason this debate was set up for? I don't agree with this closure but I have asked the TAG a relevant question ie how long can they carry on? Jim Knight was as clear as he could be, he back the closure of THS. How is this my propaganda?

a very public sociologist said...

Unfortunately this comes as no surprise. Meredith has served his masters in the regional apparatus of the Labour party very well, and now he's been given the heave ho, no new council leader, what ever their affiliation (even Labour!) will be as beholden to them as Meredith was/is. Between now and the scrapping of the mayoralty Meredith will work his cotton socks off to get as many unpopular policies through as possible.

Some Labour activists have a clue, but those who hold all the power haven't.

Alderman said...

I'm reading this blog for the first time after being told of it. Some suff is quite interesting and others very funny which is a nice change from the usual spoonfed journo drivel.
The comment in one paage by Ms Garner is quite revealing.'heavebn forbid we are taken over'. Hello?
As a long standing former councillor, I can say with authority that this is the same thing we said 20 years ago and nothing has changed.
Other than, we've now actually allowed it to happen. Those in the West Midlands have always wanted this and now the coalition have finally nailed it.
I'm glad to see one or two notable people around here actually ight to tell you and as far as I can see, very much at their expense.
Meredith is squeezed in, he pushes through an outside change and Knight nods through. No one should be under any illusion that those fighting were proven right.Hit back and fight back if you believe it to be wrong.Name names and you'll always find a southern accent linked to the scam.
Read a loyalists manifesto and you'll see new schools open.Truth is you'e been shit on by what is called yes men from Birmingham. Do you really believe Mr.Flello is with us? Not a prayer. He's allowed to break ranks to keep the crowd onside. A political trick for shysters and knobheads who get suckered. Toughen up and give them shit.Beware of strangers bearing gifts and offering politeness when all you require is how they vote and voted or intend to vote and why Accept nothing.Question everything.Vote them out for dishonesty of Stoke.

Anonymous said...

Well done Fibbs next step Leader of the Council then you can turn out the street lights.

Anonymous said...

Nothing of a racial nature about this story - no comments by Craig, Terry and the rest of the British Nazi Party.

Anonymous said...

The problem is that the City Council has no proper scrutiny of Education; The BNP chair of the Children & Young People Scrutiny Commission has failed the people of Stoke by not holding the executive to account correctly. If Coleman (BNP Councillor) had organised a task and finish report upon the BSF proposal, more detailed debate and argument could have taken places within the City Council, unfortunately the BNP have failed due to their lack of ability to take part in the political process and Meredith has rail-road his plans threw knowing the weakness of the BNP.

nicky said...

Anonymous 17:01, well said!

Shaun, another nail but a long way from the final one as we shall fight on.

Craig, I too have criticised our MPs, but I give credit to them in this case. I’ve put the youtube web links on the other blog, so if you haven’t seen you could have a look. Rob Flello’s anger there can not be made up. And to be fair they did put forward an alternative proposal ages ago. I personally completely agree with you though on Meredith, ridiculous outsourcing of education, the need for schools in communities, labour being maniacs in there social cohesion drive and mad for forcing academies on us.

Nita, the TAG do not agree it is time to ‘move on’ if that means sitting back and letting them do what they want. And we are most certainly not deflated from the communications I have had with other TAG members this evening. We will ‘move on’ by stepping up the fight.

The judge, it’s not so much being fooled as just giving credit where it is due and taking support that is offered. Of course I know there are political motivations everywhere. And labour’s a mess because we’ve got labour Meredith and councillors and government fighting against us while local labour party and MPs are fighting for us. Your last sentence applies to Knight.

Gary, I agree they should lose the court case as they don’t have the reasonable arguments, but then I’m obviously biased. Thanks for your support.

Terry, I totally agree that labour are like dictators, especially Meredith and their "we know best" attitude while their lists of failures grow is one of the things that most irritates me about labour these days.

Tony, I’m referring to the title “Trentham High to Close – Final!” Because of course you know it isn’t final, as you’ve been through it with Longton. So you know the procedure is that a statutory notice of closure is issued, which it hasn’t been yet. Then there is the statutory 6 week period, during which we all write objection letters, which can object to the whole bsf and flawed consultation as well as school specific issues. There will be a lot of letters because that helps with the court case(s) (any contributions from supporters here would be most welcome when the time comes). Trentham and Blurton notices the next to appear at a guess. Then after the 6 weeks Meredith and the EMB tossers decide to close the school(s). That is in principle the final decision then. Except for Trentham at least it won’t be because that is the point at which we can take them to court on the closure, the flawed bsf plans and not following the ministerial guidance document on school closures. The court case we’re doing now on academy sponsors is just something we can do while we wait, the court case on the closure will be another one. One thing you say in your blog that isn’t strictly true is that Knight ‘believes that a new academy on Blurton is a better prospect than keeping Trentham’. What he said was his usual line that he will not intervene in local decisions. What he also said was that he was willing to sacrifice the pupils of Longton and Trentham because he thinks (unreasonably) that this somehow benefits the rest of the city. Personally I am outraged at his treatment of both Longton and Trentham on this one. The other point is what he has signed off is just the Strategy for Change part 1, which is fairly general. There is a part 2 which is more detailed and as he is leaving local decisions, Meredith could change things if he wanted to. So the questions you have raised: 1. “whether members of the TAG will accept this decision now or carry on with their fight?” – undoubtedly scale up the fight. 2. “when they will realise that to carry on fighting in the wake of the statement by Jim Knight will be like flogging a dead horse” – well we don’t realise it because we just don’t agree with you there, we have good court cases. Then you make some statements that aren’t really questions: 1. “It seems like the final nail in the coffin of Trentham High” – as I said to Shaun, far from final. 2. “As much as I don't agree with the closure of this popular and well performing school there will be no final reprieve” – In principle Meredith could but I don’t think so. The EMB members if they are invigorated enough to show they are part of the future of the city rather than Meredith and the past, could if they chose make waves in our favour, I wait to see if any of them are intelligent enough to do that. The court cases though are most likely to win out. So there can be a final reprieve. I can not be sure we will succeed but I think there is a good chance that is well worth fighting for.

A very public sociologist, yes you’ve summed that up pretty well.

Alderman, I am taking the points about political games people play, I understand that and am not fooled and agree with being tough and giving them what you said. I disagree with you on your attitude to southerners, Brummies, West Midlanders etc. though. I don’t have any prejudice against anyone from anywhere per se, it’s what they do or don’t do that matters.

Shaun Bennett said...

I too was taking the headline at face value, but I certainly hope that the campaign will indeed fight on and be successful, Nicky. Good luck to all those involved.

Debbie said...

To anonymous
I hate these spineless t*ssers who will not sign their blogs. My advice to you is to encourage your children to be upwardly mobile and to move to a nice area like Bentilee.
Some people don't lie down, some keep fighting I guess the former live in Blurton. Up the Joker Duck?

Anonymous said...

Can anyone tell me whats wrong in sending your children to a new school at Blurton?

nita said...

Nicky. When I say, "isn't it time to move on", I just get the impression that no matter what is done, these plans will go ahead.

Yes, you are right, the Closure Notices will be issued, and you will get your 6 weeks, to object. Will they take any notice of these objections, No. The EMB will meet, and the closures will be passed through. I am all for new schools, and do welcome the funding, but Academies, I'm not too convinced, that we need so many across the City. They are not proven to improve education, so it is a big gamble for our LA to take. I totally blame the Government for this, they are the ones forcing these Academies on us. I believe, the more Academies you put in for, the more funding you get. Yes, many of our schools need a new building, and we need to address these falling pupil numbers, but a good balance of schools would have been better, maybe a few more Trusts. Having said that, these Academies may do the opposite, and be the best thing to happen for the kids. We just do not know.

Berryhill and Mitchell, have had 2 schools serving them for years, what are they ending up with, the choice of an Academy at Park Hall, or the choice of travelling to Birches Head. If they are really lucky, they will get a place at St Peter's. Is this placing schools in the community, as listed in the dcsf and bsf guidelines? I think not.

I have no doubt that the TAG will continue the fight, and go all the way with the court case. That is upto them.

As anonymous asks, what is actually wrong with sending your kids to a school with Blurton? This is a question that many people are asking.

Longton North said...

Nicky, get in the real world and step out of junior politics.
Fisher and Whalley oppose Academies and the destruction of the collegiate system of schooling and openly protest with feeling.
Flello is a West Midlands hatchet yes man who's here to deliver Downing Streets agenda. A bag carrier wanting promotion at all costs.
Put it to Flello directly.
Do you (Flello) agree with the Academy scheme rolling out across the Country. Yes or No.
He will lie if he says No.
Then nail him in his pitiful fight for Trentham which goes against the entire plan.
He's singing to the crowd and hoping nobody notices he can't sing.
No passion, no valour, no honesty and a complete fake.
A bag carrier.

margaret said...

nita, get off the fence and make a decision.academys good academys bad. which is it? councillors have to vote on either, what would you do in their place? and stop saying its all the governments fault.blame your councillors. without them nothing happens.so spot the difference f difference of opinion and thenmake your own decision. get off the fence and hit back at those causing you misery.

nita said...

Longton North. We keep hearing the statement, they are West Midlands followers. Can you explain what all this means? Do they follow totally different policies. Do they have different agendas. I am interested to find out, as we the public really don't know the ins and outs, of what is really going on.

I have a feeling that, because we have the Labour Councillors following different directions, this is why they are not standing as a united front within the Council.

nita said...

Margaret. Ha Ha!! Oh my god, you sound like my kids. They always accuse me of sitting on the fence. Now, I am seriously worried. Am I really that bad? Will have to have a re think, and become Mrs Nasty.

Academies good or bad? Haven't got a clue, you tell me. Who really knows the answer?

How can we blame the Councillors, as at the end of the day, the Mayor and Council Manager makes the final decision. They can shout and ball, all they want, but they may as well talk to a brick wall.

Gary Elsby said...

you don't have to be nasty, Nita as that doesn't help.
Take a deep breath and ask yourself why our beloved leaders have made a decision to go with the flow of Government and ignore local opinion that says we don't need to fix something (Trentham) that isn't broke.
Our Councillors have made that decision so all they need to do is tell us why. When they do, then you will have all the facts at your disposal and make the decision, good or bad.
The referendum indicates bad across the political divide and removed the Government's chief spokesman.
Still it goes on.
Mark Meredith is a very polite man and geuinely believes in what he does and has done. He isn't nasty in closing Trentham as he doesn't need to be. For that matter, Ged Rowney is the picture of politeness and I expect nothing else.
Please don't fall into the trap of believing that all involved in local politics hate each other or want to the worst they can for Stoke. Everyone and all wants the very best for everyone.

Now make a decision, good or bad and live with it.That's politics and you will be judged on your decision itself, good or bad.We know the Government want to spend our Millions on our schools for us but what we disagree with is how Ged and Mark are spending it on their and our behalf.

Hugh said...

Trouble with Academies is the almost total secrecy that surrounds them. I've been trying for weeks to get a straight answer from the Council / Serco as to whether BSF funding for Stoke is linked to the fact that Academies are included in Serco's plan. It has been a masterclass in how to dodge the issue. To follow the correspondence (ongoing), see:
http://www.havocinstoke.org.uk/academiescommons1.html#BSF

nicky said...

OK we haven’t had that discussion about Blurton for a while so let’s have it. We have had the academy discussion recently so I’ll keep that bit brief. There are three big issues with going to Blurton from Trentham: 1. Throwing away all the educational expertise from Trentham. 2. Don’t want an academy. 3. Poor travel.

1. We are told Blurton is the predecessor school for the academy and Trentham just closes. Staff from Blurton fine, staff from Trentham discarded. That is no recipie to retain good education and improve on it. I am NOT saying Blurton staff are no good. I AM saying if an area with two schools is to have one replacement, you need to treat both schools equally and fairly to obtain the best future and operate the best transition for pupils. More recently I’ve heard a few vague comments about fair transition, but I am not convinced. I only need to look at Longton, they are not being treated fairly and the final decision on closure has been made in their case so they are more urgent.

2. Academies bad / academies good? Well I’m certainly not on any fence on that one. Academies BAD! I’m not good at putting web refs on comments but I’ll try. The evidence is out there. See for example

http://www.antiacademies.org.uk/

See also appendix 3 on page 32 of:

http://www.savetrenthamhigh.co.uk/misc/Full_Representation_to_SOT_City_Council.pdf

THS 2007 result 44%, higher than all community schools converted to academies. (THS 2008 result 57% >5GCSE A*-C inc English&maths.)

See also, hopefully, Sunday Times education supplement this Sunday.

3. Poor travel. Walking routes from bulk of Trentham and especially Hanford are awful. Would need good bridge over railway and canal. Have been told that would not happen.


Trentham and Blurton already collaborate and have some common teaching. Pupils from Trentham go to Blurton and pupils from Blurton come to Trentham for relevant classes, it works very well and I’m all for that type of arrangement. But there is no problem with transport for that because pupils are bussed by the schools.

What is needed is for Meredith and EMB to properly serve the community.
The MPs put forward sensible alternative plans that are more community based, Tony and I have discussed these on other blogs on this site. MPs on my side on this. CYP Overview & Scrutiny committee, chaired by Michael Coleman with councillors from all parties agreed (7 votes to 3) proposal to keep Trentham and federate with St. Josephs. Scrutiny on my side on that. EMB have still not performed their duty to report back on that. EMB treating council’s own scrutiny committees like sh***. Selection of very sensible alternative proposals put to council by Terry Follows, Peter Kent-Baguley and Alby Walker. Very narrowly defeated by labour/tory/libdem alliance. About half councillors on my side, half not. BSF proposals flawed, consultation flawed, closures not in line with ministerial guidance document on school closures. Courts will decide.

Anyone who says we don’t have enough pupils has got it wrong. We are currently nowhere near low enough to comply with guidelines to close. Even then closure is not recommended if performance is good.

Whatever happened to diversity and choice – just government spin. Parents in Trentham want parental coop trust school. Let us have it. Let other communities have what they choose for themselves.

Johnnyf said...

Sadly as is often the case this is all about money saving and not the future of our children.

Once the housing Market picks up Trentham's Land will be sold as a prime housing site.

I struggle to understand how creating larger schools will improve education standards.

I say this because private schools tend to be smaller and have better teacher pupil ratios and so if that is the standard we need our new schools to mirror those if standards really are to be improved

nita said...

Hugh. This is the trouble, if you research Academies, on some sites, you are told, that GCSE results have improved, over the predecessor schools. On the other hand, certain information tells us that some are a disaster, and are on the failing list. It is the uncertainty of their success, that concerns many parents.

Does this actually mean that it is the Academy itself. No, it could be a bad selection of sponsors, governor's and staff.

Just because some don't want these Academies, many do, and I can speak for lots of people from my estate, and they are looking forward to when this new school is in place at Park Hall.

The people with the worst case scenario, are those choosing schools over the next few years. They have limited choice, and will more likely than not, get the first preference, as schools will be full.

Gary Elsby said...

Hugh, good point. Is the BSF plan linked to Academies? I don't know but if I get £100 for every time I hit my thumb with a hammer, I can earn £300 very easily, even if it hurts a bit.
I can't see why a link is not there and in fact we could potentially get many Millions more by wanting Academies here, whether they be good or bad!

Personally, I don't believe the crap put out about Labour suggesting no Academies=no money at all.

That's not Labour by any standards.
Sounds reasonable though to suggest more for more.
I should know this but I don't so I'm going to hit my thumb for free.

warren said...

Nicky, I know how strongly you fell on this, All I can say is how are theachers judged. I belive it sould be by there pupels abilaty to pass ther GCSE or whatever thay sit now. If you look at it that way, Trentham as far better then Blurton High, there results are far better, it speaks for itself witch set of theachers sould find employment at the new school.

terry turbo said...

Anonymous 00.39, you are behind the times,I have commented as the once again poor distortion of my post by Joseph Stalin proves, and his/hers posting another distortion on the Sentinel webb-site,and Brooneyes has also commented.
I have not been convinced that Acadamies are better, as I believe smaller, community based schools give the children a better education, because pupil to teacher knowledge of each other is better.

Sir Findo Gask said...

A couple of things to do with schools generally..

Why when I am driving through Longton at 14:20 school children are going home?

I see the ETC thing hasn't gone away yet..

http://www.thisisstaffordshire.co.uk/news/suspend-Marbella-row-headteacher/article-450918-detail/article.html

But we can't talk about that here ;0)

warren said...

Again the good Sir Findo as a very good point, why at 14:30 each day is Longton full of unruley kids. When I was a kid we got let out at 16:00 and not second before. It can not be becouse of the dark nights as its goes on all year round. As for small schools v large debate, lets put it this way, at the moment we have a failing education system localy and some rather large schools, need I go on.

Alison said...

My only comment on Sir Findo's query would be - Edensor's kids are let out at 14:10, Longton High's kids don't leave school until 15:10.

Sir Findo Gask said...

Thanks Alison.

Can anyone explain why though?

So are we saying that we only educate our children for less than 5 hours a day?

When I was at School, we used to be there 0900 - 1600 each day..

warren said...

Could anyone please conferm the start time at ETC. If it anytime after 08:30, they must not be schooling there pupels right.

Sir Findo Gask said...

Warren,

Have a look at http://www.edensortc.com/prospectus.asp

Page six of the document. The kids do start at about 0830..

Shaun Bennett said...

When I went to Edensor we had perfectly straight-forward hours 08:45-15.15 every day. Since Mr Mercer arrived however it seems to have declined in many ways. I believe the start time is now slightly earlier to compensate for the earlier finish, and I understand that the hour lunch break that we enjoyed has been reduced to just half an hour. I think the times are different on Friday's though.

There was a time when Edensor was seen as being a reasonably decent school-certainly my experiences there were largely positive. Its very sad that over the last 10 years it has declined to the point when most people don't seem to actually care that it is being closed.

Alison said...

Shaun, sorry to shatter your illusions, but Edensor is not being closed. Mr Mercer did a deal with Serco to ensure that Edensor became the predecessor school for the Parkhall Academy, even though he and his Chair of Governors were in discussions about a merger with Longton, for a new school near to the existing Longton site.

Mr Mercer's deal ensures that he and his teaching staff transfer to the Parkhall Academy (so I am led to believe by Serco officials), to the detriment of the teachers at Longton, Berryhill and Mitchell - all of whom were originally told at the consultation meetings in November 2007, that the 4 schools would all close and the best staff would get jobs at Parkhall Academy.

Good old Mr Mercer - is this "deal" with Serco something else that perhaps most of his governors don't know about??

warren said...

My god what is ETC playing at, them poor kids are only in school on a part time basis.Now I come to think of it, I know they also do some work online so that may cover some of the shortfall. Mercer's days are numbered as head anyway, no-one can be so disliked and keep there job, unless your names Mark Meredith.

Shaun Bennett said...

I meant that the present ETC site is still going to be closed, as I imagine the Parkhall acadamy will probably be sited at Parkhall. I don't actually think that that is necessary or indeed appropriate, but it seems that I'm in a minority.

gobowen said...

Meredith, or he who is now known as the "Walking Dead" down at The Kremlin, is Hell Bent on driving through the School Closures as fast as possible.
Someone had a horrendous thought the other day.
Mark Fisher elevated to the House of Lords and just have a guess who would be parachuted in as the replacement Labour Candidate.
Yes you guessed correctly:- Darling Markie!!!!!

Mick. said...

Fisher into the Lords is a long shot for a rebel and besides, the chance of getting past Gary Elsby is none.

warren said...

I'll get the shot gun out if that happens, but I could not see that happening, but if it did, Stoke Centrel would send the first BNP MP to Westminster.

Alison said...

Surely Stoke Central wouldn't be so stupid as to put Mark Meredith up as a candidate for MP?

He couldn't even win the referendum, and single handedly destroyed the public's faith in the Elected Mayor system in Stoke on Trent, so I would have thought the chances of him receiving ANY votes at such an election are slim.

The point made by Warren is a very good one - Stoke Central would in all probability return the first BNP MP following such an election.

The whole thought fills me with dread. How could anybody consider Mark Meredith an appropriate candidate for MP in Stoke? Mars - yes, Stoke - no!!

Shaun Bennett said...

The problem is that whilst its all very well saying that, we all know don't we that the people of Stoke will probably still elect Mark Meredith as MP if he were to be Labour's candidate for Stoke Central at the next election.

Its exactly what I've been saying about voters getting the candidates they deserve. If they continue to blindly vote Labour 'because they're the working class party' then they will continue to be taken for granted by the Labour machine.

brooneyes said...

All three main parties have let the people of Stoke-on-Trent down, either with the damaging policies they have implmented, or by sitting
on the sidelines, letting Labour get away with it. A BNP MP would be a bloody good thing for the area, and at least the electorate would have someone there who would genuinely fight for them.