THE SCHOOL WAS NEVER BIG ENOUGH, SO WHY WAS IT BUILT AND WHY WON'T THE COUNCIL SOLICITOR, BARRY KHAN, ALLOW ANY QUESTIONS ON THIS SUBJECT EVEN AT MARCH 2013!
Why then deliberately build the North Reddish School too small just one year ago?
In the documents below, it is admitted that before the school is even built, it is not big enough for all those who wish to attend. They had already promised a place for every child who needed one in the school closure notice. They intended to house the extra children in temporary classrooms until the birthrate fell, but 1) the birthrate in the area was rising sharply and 2) the demands of Sport England meant there was no room for temporary classrooms.
"You are building this school too small", I said, "and here is the evidence." "Don't be vexatious", they replied. Schulz, Goddard Sager, Webb, Weldon, Smith, Derbyshire, Khan, Pantall, Candler et al.
The birthrate in the area is rising sharply, even back in 2006/2007. Why was a school built which was never big enough even before it was built for the number of pupils who needed to attend? "Why is the Council building a school at massive expense when it is not big enough and there is no room for expansion on the site", I asked. "Don't be vexatious", they replied.
Please see above. Even though they knew they knew the new school was nowhere near big enough even in its first year of opening, they never considered keeping the Fir Tree nursery on the Fir Tree site. Why not, I wonder?
They always knew at the outset that in 2009 there would be 563 children who needed to go to the school.
Strict secrecy and quietly inform Chris Wollard of NPS Stockport....that the school can't be built big enough. Why build it then?
This school had to go on that site -
And when a planning consultant suggests putting political pressure on a planning committee to pass this lethal development and no-
Is there corruption in planning at Stockport Council? My belief is there most certainly is. None of this has been done in the interests of the pupils, teachers, residents or council taxpayers -
Stockport Council's Fraud Policy. Has anyone at the Council read it because it is not adhered to.
HANTALL DEVELOPMENTS LTD
INTERIM PAYMENT CLASSROOM EXTENSION BROADSTONE HALL PRIMARY SCHOOL
From a concerned observer:-
"I see your point of North Reddish birthrate of 224 in 2006/7 and the expected intake of 75 to 81 per year. I have no answer other than are we comparing apples and pears. Surely there must be another school(s) served by the PCT referred to. My answer is a simple FOI " how does 224 reconcile with 75"
Perhaps I'm a bit simple. The minutes of this meeting 28th April 2006 read like the Wannsee Conference. "Ah ja how meny filthy jews can ve put in this school. If ve have too meny we increase the class size. No one vill notice. We can't mein commandant that vill upset the SS"
I realise in the real world, hard choices have to be made BUT for a school portrayed and promoted as the best solution ( I almost said the Final Solution) for all North Reddish education problems there are obviously FAR too many basic problems that are known about and have no available solution given; planned for and just referred for future discussion ( the buck is being passed well and truly by this committee); and this is all happening well down the line of implementation.
Sheila you are tapping a goldmine of information. Has it occurred to you that either some whistle blower similar to XXXX is feeding you this or the higher ups are resigned to you just getting it and not realising what you've got?"