TV ads instead of demos

Whilst Extinction Rebellion are trying to sell us their story, they do so by stopping traffic, apologetic, no less, they cause a disturbance.

They say, they need to do this, to make us aware of the climate agenda.

But, what about taking out a TV ad instead. You cannot reach more people than with a TV ad. XR got lots of money, they have extremely rich sponsors, so TV ads, should be affordable for them.

And as it is such a good cause, ITV or other commercial channels may even chip in and half the price?

Apparently the Chief Medical officer, constantly appears in between our favourite program to remind us of corona Virus dangers, he wouldn’t dream stopping traffic to remind a few drivers of the dangers.

Obviously XR want to use the issue to radicalise ‘rebel’s, teach them how to interrupt and feel good about it. They use and abuse us to train political resistance.

dream on Boris

women looking at cellphone

Photo by Andrea Piacquadio on Pexels.com

Whilst our Prime Minister today announced the closing of all schools from Friday PM, Boris said that children should not be looked after by grandparents, as they are more vulnerable in catching diseases.

I don’t want to use improper language in commenting but instead say that a recent YouGov poll, on behalf of Age Uk established that 40% of grandparents, over the age of 50, provided regular childcare for their grandchildren.

Either Boris wants all working parents to take an extended holiday and full government funded pay or start to become realistic to the fact that grandparents do look after children.

Additionally, there are naturally older parents, who conceived and bore children later in life.

The general attitude that all older people are unsuitable to look after children because they are more susceptible to catching Corona are cobbeles.

There are also quite a number of grandparents who took over full-time childcare because the parents are unable to do so. At least 10% of children in London looked after by family members other than the parent, so-called kinship carers.

Boris Johnson’s remarks are purely age-discriminating.

No symptoms

We are a mixed household, old and young together. Nobody here has any symptomps of Corona Virus. My grandson came for a sleepover last Saturday. He puked non-stop. He had picked up a nursery virus from his little sister because that’s what little kids get in nurseries.

Having raised a lot of children, I am immune against that kind of stuff. I sent the lad back home, the rest of his family have the same. When young families with young children, who go to nursery, get those bugs, it takes them a few years to become resiliant to them. I just don’t have junior Calpol laying around anymore, so can’t medicate for that.

Our school is still open, good as well. We’ve worked so hard to make a success of the GCSE that a closure now would be a slap in the face. Our teachers are also still standing. We are going to a small school, that’s probably one reason why we are less affected.

I keep on arguing against those big super-schools, they have defnitely more risk of things going wrong. Corona is the proof. The people from the local education authority look at me in a strange way when I argue that small schools are better. Just as per pupil funding makes large schools more economical. Government, you need to change funding for schools.

Our swimming club has closed down. All competitions have been stopped and that is despite the chlorinated water protecting the swimmers, but I suppose it’s more to do with spectators and elderly officials.

We are doing OK, no symptoms of Corona at all. I have taken my temperature yesterday and I seem to be losing heat rather than gaining it. No persistant cough and I shall go out to get fresh fruit in. That is the most important point, keeping fresh air and good fresh food coming.

The desperate time government

vehicle driving on freeway towards wind turbines

Hard shoulders are used as driving lanes on many motorways now. Photo by Pixabay on Pexels.com

They call it gender discrimination but in the times when women stayed at home to look after the kids, we could manage when a school closed. Now all are drafted in as workers and when the workers fall ill, there is nobody to run services and nobody to look after children.

Not even in an equalised society, lets say dads or mums can stay at home any longer because parents have to work when a child is 5 now, and can no longer wait until they reached the age of 13.

woman wearing blue jeans

Photo by Luis Quintero on Pexels.com

If you have people idling around, they can be seen as potentially spare workers but if the country already uses the last man standing to work on, then in a crisis, we have no reserves left and start to panic.

The removal of hard shoulders on motorways, showed all drivers that the non-contingency policies lead to serious problems. If a car breaks down on a lane on a motorway where all lanes are in use, emergency vehicles cannot reach them.

If all parents are working and schools need to close, then who is going to look after the children? Or if workers need to stay at home with children then who is going to do the work?

Supermarkets are our best friends, because they charge the same price whatever the demand. In some unregulated remote, local shops, owners just double and treble prices, during the Corona Virus crisis,  because they just want to make as much as they can out of a crisis.

But what is disturbing, is that quantities are not regulated and those unfortunate enough, not being able to get to a supermarket at 7am in the morning will find empty shelves.

At the Sainsbury’s superstore, there were exactly 8 loaves of freshly baked bread in the shelve at 7:15AM. There was no pasta, no toilet paper at all.

Amazingly people do not opt for the fresh foods. Salads, fruits and veg are the only thing you can do to strengthen the immune system. Eat them regularly to stay healthy.

Bunking off school – a bad idea

greta-mud

Picture from Greta Thunberg’s rally, picture from BBC. People demanded that the organisers pay for the damage to the greenery. 

I could mobilise, on any given day, hundreds of pupils who want to bunk off school for a cause. It’s not 15-year olds who drive or developed the cars, which ruin our environment but 15-year olds with good GCSE results  are our best chance of getting young people qualified to develop the new technology needed to change our environment for the better.

Missleading young people that standing in a field of mud, risking their safety and not going to school, is not doing us any favours. Yet, there are the Human Rights advocates who strongly encourage anybody to take up their right to demonstrate.

Demonstrating is about as easy as eating a donut. Eating too many donuts makes you fat and doing too many demos, makes you docile.

Why did Bristol allow this demonstration to happen?

Kids you are not improving our world by not learning.

It’s very disappointing that the BBC news only show people in favour of the demos and do not also show people who voice against. It’s not neutral the reporting.

Really bad the comments of a member of the teachers union, saying that children need to bunk off school and strike to get more confident. What a lot of nonsense. They need to get confidence through learning not by standing in a sea of mud.

turning up noses at poor white children

I have to put the distinction of colour into this post as traditionally Christian children were white and that explains the term of working class and under-achieving white boys.

Perhaps the latest round of austerity helped to increase that problem with under-funding of schools and policies that drive poor people out of cities; that led to an emptying of working class families from Tower Hamlets.

Whilst at the same time there is an influx of immigrants from coloured back-grounds, which are mainly of the Muslim religion, the problems encountered through that, make a Church of England Secondary school in Tower Hamlets the victim of council cuts in education provision.

Whilst Raine’s accepts pupils from all backgrounds, religions and creeds, many pull up their nose on the C.o.E. school and prefer to achieve in the newer, less historic schools of the borough.

If we add into that equation, the deep hate against the monarchy, a weak Church of England school seems the perfect victim to cull that extra bit of establishment in the borough.

Fair enough, you don’t like the monarchy, but why let it out on vulnerable children?

Whilst councillors vehemently deny this and sway popular argument against the school, the governor minutes from Raine’s Foundation school show clearly that at one point, they had almost the whole swathe of pupils under child protection in the school.

Repeatedly the councillors try to deny that the proportion of pupils on child protection could not have been as high as stated, yet the minutes of the governors board dated 21. September 2017 clearly states that the cases of children with short-term child protection issues had gone up to 32% and that 210 children had CP issues. A fact firmly denied by Councillor Hassell.

Tower Hamlets council says the achievements of the school are not high enough, yet the school followed the legacy of their founder, Henry Raine’s, to educate the poor of the borough. Whilst a lot of schools just expel and put out of the way into special provision and often into the hands of criminal gangs, Raine’s actually educated those kids.

What Tower Hamlets wants to see is excellence in education – that is a good aim – and get rid of those nasty pockets of under-achievement. Moving families out of the borough is one way of achieving this; yet it is just a momentary whitewash.

But Christine McInnes’ attempt to appear to have ulturistic concerns for education in the borough is politically tainted.

It would be cheaper in monetary terms, for tax payers, to save the school. Already £17 Million have been poured into the new and refurbished buildings and it would be more than feasable to reduce the intake of other schools and channel pupils to Raine’s rather than close Raine’s and throw the pupils and staff into the wind.

Raine’s Sixth form is superior compared to Oaklands, yet Tower Hamlets sent Raine’s Sixth formers into Oaklands, who cannot continue their chosen curriculum. It is clearly discriminating what is happening here.

Clearly the school has educated many children well enough to send them to university. Yet councillors simply never mentioned the positive achievements of the school.

It appears they hate the monarchy so much that they want to show-case a Church of England school as sheer failure to have a good reason to dimish the hated part of the monarchy, that comes in the shape of the Church of England and victimise a school full of followers.

You may believe in God or not, you may like the monarchy or not, but why let it out on a bunch of children. The school has provided an immeasurable amount of support to the poor of the borough and prevented a lot of kids falling into the wrong hands and did a lot of good.

It would have been fair if Christine McInnes and Councillor Hassell at least would have found the charity to mention the many kids who went onto A-levels and university but they could not bring themselves to do so. Shame on them.

Obviously the school had building work going on for about two years. An extra building was added whilst the old part was re-furbished. In that time, the intake had to be reduced. Yet the council takes this intake reduction as a reason to declare that the school is no longer popular and parents do not want the school.

TH-school-map-criteria

Raine’s school is located at the most northern part you can see on this map. Away from the underground network, in a green and leafy area near Victoria Park

The north of the borough is a bit of waste-land with little service provision. Our local schools are just about the only services available here. The area is near Victoria Park.

The council now has increased admissions for Oaklands on 26. Feb 2020, the only other near school, by 60, before even the last appeal procedure against the closure of Raine’s has completed, deadline was 28. Feb 2020.

They just added one word proposed closure, whilst the closure process was started 2 years agao already. The council wants to force the poor white children out of their comfort zone and force them to mix with the newer immigrants in the setting they prefer rather than the other way around.

You can see the new borders of admission preference areas this council has created to parcel local pupils and bunch them into certain schools into areas, that have been drawn up for reasons unknown. Look at the area borders and you wonder what’s wrong with this council.

As you can see from the map, north-east is nothing but park, the area borders onto Hackney and Tower Hamlets council expects local Hackney schools to accept some over-spill from the closure of Raine’s because it can’t afford to keep the school open. Yet the council is well able to keep on running the annual fireworks display, free of charge, in Victoria Park, which is mainly visited by Hackney residents, usually a total of 75.000 spectators. Not even the Mayor of London puts on free fireworks on New Year’s eve any longer, they charge for those now, and ticket the event. Yet the Mayor of Tower Hamlets feels fit to put on free fireworks displays but shuts down schools to save money.

negativity rules the roost

I have again watched the webcast of the call-in meeting of 18. February 2020 to question the decision of the Mayor to close Raine’s Foundation school.

I find it very disturbing that those councillors pushing for closure have not had one good word to say about the school. There are pupils in the school who are high achievers and part of the talented pupil program. Pupils go onto university. The Raine’s Sixth form is rated good and performs better than Oaklands.

Yet, all the councillors purported was that the school is a failure.

Councillor Hassell stated that the pupil numbers showed a drop-off from 2011 – 2015. Yet he forgot to mention that during that time, half the school was closed due to building work going on. The Upper school had the new building added and pupils were moved to the Lower School. The Lower school was occupied by pupils up until 2016. Then the lower building was closed due to refurbishment.

A pupil had fallen to her death in October 2010 because she was sliding down the bannisters and improvements to the building were made to prevent such further tragedies. This tragic accident had a great impact on applications of pupils.

According to the HSE, 55% of all accidents in educational facilities are due to slips and trips. There were 2.000 reported cases in 2014 alone.

Again, the lamenting about falling standards over a long perioed of time, when this is all historical and firmly rooted in the fact that the school had an extraordinary amount of children on child protection.

Repeatedly the councillors try to deny that the proportion of pupils on child protection could not have been as high as stated, yet the minutes of the governors board dated 21. September 2017 clearly states that the cases of children with short-term child protection issues had gone up to 32% and that 210 children had CP issues. A fact firmly denied by Councillor Hassell.

Clearly that is a Christian school who has taken on the kids most in need of support and this very act is thrown back into their face and they are blamed for doing the Christian thing and educating those most in need of support.

And also the head teachers report at the time stated that attendance had gone up by 1.8% and was above the national average.

Again on 30. November 2018 it was minuted that the school had a high number of CP issues and vulnerable students.

Obviously all those comments Christine McInnes made about obvious bad behaviour during an inspection can be apportioned to the large number of special support students in the school, who had not been there long enough and were being worked with.

The school should be commended for tackling such issues and preventing further exclusions of pupils, as exclusions often lead to pupils being drawn into criminal gangs.

A complaint made to the Council about incorrect statements made by Christine McInnes about the ownership of the Lower School Building in Old Bethnal Green Road makes it clear that the promises the council made to pupils, that if they change to Oaklands, they will be able to benefit from the Raine’s Lower Building is proven as incorrect as the Council does not mainly own the site.

To date the proposal is to increase the intake of Oaklands school by 60 pupils per year but no building is set aside yet, to cope with the extra intake.

The whole strategy around the amalgamation and between Raine’s and Oaklands and the closure of Raine’s is put on assumptions.

 

TV interview about Raine’s closure

A freelance journalist and camera operative will be outside of Raine’s Foundation school in Approach Road today at 2pm today, 22. Feb. 2020 and all our residents who want to participate in this filming are more than welcome to join us. The interviews will be shown on national TV.

Please let us know how the closure of Raine’s school affected you and your family.

Whilst we see a few school amalgamations taking place in the borough, Raine’s parents were hit especially hard as our closure and planned amalgamation does not go anyway as planned. We did not expect this to happen as we just had a brand-new building with refurbishments of the Lower school, costing £17 Million, money that will not be spent in the best interest of Council tax payers in the borough.

Our parents work locally and expected to send their kids to the local school and we all paid our council taxes, which were invested into that new school building. Instead the council wants to spent more money on building a new school in Wapping instead and close our school here in Bethnal Green.

Please come outside of Raine’s school this afternoon and voice your concerns.

contract holds the key

Whilst we continue to hear horror stories how tax payer’s money is wasted on either useless projects or bad management, it is always the poorest and most vulnerable who are made to pay for misdemeanors under this system.

Why can’t tax payers bring class-actions against those who wasted their money? Nobody is ever held responsible for money wasted.

The recent case of the Tower Hamlets school debacle, whereby Tower Hamlets council subsidised a Church of England school to the tune of £18 Million and can’t get the cash back shows there must be a serious problem with contracts.

They rather close the new school and build another one instead of using the one they got and make something of it.

Why can’t public bodies who finance projects protect themselves against loss and why can’t they make beneficiaries liable for losses incurred.

In this case the school governor system is not working well. School governors don’t have a personal liability, so nobody can in fact be held to account.

We have started to deal with excessive salaries some company bosses pay themselves whilst the companies go broke by trying to cap salaries. But in the case of public money wasted on bad decisions there is only one group of people losing out, the homeless, the poor, the vulnerable and the children who get less services.

It is just not good enough, that our laws are not protecting the people but only those who own property.

Governments change more and more frequently so that decisionmakers hardly ever have to take the brunt of incompetences.

Yet whilst on the private basis individuals can trash out contracts to deal with potential losses and/or insure themselves against it, why can’t councils or governments do the same?

It seems that public services is a big melting pot for a distribution of tax payers money that ends up not in the hands of those who don’t need it most.

We do get performance contracts for football club managers or other employees in companies and those not shaping up loose posts and get sacked but in public services a job is a job.

 

Council gifts Church of England £18 Million

raines school

the brand-new building of Raine’s Foundation school

As the Raine’s Foundation saga now nears it’s bitter-sweet end, it emerged last night that in fact the winner is the Church of England and one of it’s charities, the Raine’s Foundation Trust.

Apparently Tower Hamlets Council has invested £17 Million Pounds into the new building in Approach Road and into the Lower Building in Old Bethnal Green Road.

I gotten this information solely from watching last night’s call-in meeting, screened via a life-stream from the Tower Hamlets Council chamber. As a Steering Group Committee member I am on a confidentiality clause and I am not allowed to discuss what is said in Steering Group meetings.

Yet yesterday’s council meeting, mentioned in my previous post, says everything we need to know. Not only invested the council £17 Million into buildings, owned by the Church of England, they also put up £1Million to fund the education of pupils in an under-used school, which is to close.

Fancy that the school needs to close because they have no money to repay the funds lost through the failure of raising an incomee from the government because of the low pupil numbers.

Apparently the council was unable to strike a contract to say that they have a claim on the estate. No, it’s a gift to the Raine’s Foundation mainly, who can take the building and walk away with it.

So whose losing out? Perhaps the local parents and pupils who love their local school and who have been thrown out of it by the use of clever arguments, saying, the performance isn’t good enough, the pupil numbers aren’t high enough but the buildings stand and are ready to use.

That’s very clever of those who made a packet out of this one. Apparently school’s finance is not closely monitored in line with regulation each year.

Needless to say the Council meeting last night refused to allow the call-in and so the Mayor of Tower Hamlets won’t be looking at the closure order again.

Interestingly one of Christine McInness’s favourite arguments all along is that pupils usually do one grade better if they do something else. So, if you go to Raine’s you get one grade lower, if you get a job you get one grade lower too. She says all the teachers at Raine’s are not doing well and that meeting last night, totally trashed the governors of the school as incompetent.

But who is really incompetent here?

She also said that 95% of pupils in Tower Hamlets go to Excellent or above average schools. The government statistics show that in Tower Hamlets the truth is very different.

Out of 19 Secondary schools 11 – 16 years provision there are

  • well above average 4 schools
  • above average 5 schools
  • average 4 schools
  • below average 4 schools
  • worst and not improving 1 schools
  • well below average 1 school

Raine’s is on position 17 in this list. The number 17 however, seems the lucky number as the council invested £17 Million into the buildings of the school with nothing to show for it.

But whilst the new government now refuses entry visas to low-skilled workers, whose going to educate those who will be doing the fruit picking and toilet cleaning in future? Those will hardly be entering the UK in the back of lorries. If we are to supply labour ourselves, do they really need the highest grades in all schools for all pupils anyway? Has Britain entered a downward spiral?

Previous Older Entries

Blog Stats

  • 53,624 hits