New Portobello High School - on going issues

Bob Jefferson · Post by **Bob Jefferson** » 17 Dec 2008, 17:57

From today's EN:

Parents call on city to borrow to update crumbling schools

seanie · Post by **seanie** » 18 Dec 2008, 17:08

Just heard that progressing with PHS has been approved by the Council.

Don't know if there were any amendments or the tally of votes but it looks like another hurdle's been cleared.

Bob Jefferson · Post by **Bob Jefferson** » 18 Dec 2008, 17:52

I believe the Greens voted against and Hawkins abstained, but still a landslide victory as expected.

seanie · Post by **seanie** » 18 Dec 2008, 18:01

Letters: Battle will go on against furtive park land scheme

Bob Jefferson · Post by **Bob Jefferson** » 18 Dec 2008, 18:25

From a friend:

They (the Greens) put forward an amendment proposing the Viridor site which got no support, so they opposed the main motion.

seanie · Post by **seanie** » 18 Dec 2008, 18:42

The Freightliner terminal?

Have they not been paying attention?

Pal of Porty · Post by **Pal of Porty** » 18 Dec 2008, 23:27

seanie wrote:The Freightliner terminal? Have they not been paying attention?

It was terrible - a bit like watching one of your friends in a slow motion car crash. The days for arguing the Earth is flat are over yet they sought to delay the building of PHS for the evaluation of a site that was now free because the waste plant was refused. Pity they never bothered to read the Consultants report way back in 2006 - they would have found out why it was unsuitable.

I voted for Green because they promised they would support the school on Portobello Park. I will never ever ever ever vote for anything to do with them again at level on any topic.

Pal of Porty · Post by **Pal of Porty** » 18 Dec 2008, 23:30

And as for the PPAG lies and propaganda presentation......

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

Wangi - I have just moderated it myself to save you the trouble.

Bob Jefferson · Post by **Bob Jefferson** » 18 Dec 2008, 23:32

I'm frankly astonished at the actions of the Greens. I got this message from Peter McColl just last night:

Dear Bob,

Thank you for contacting me. I think, and hope, that you will be content with the stance Greens take at tomorrow's council meeting.

Do let me know what you think after the meeting.

Yours,
Peter

Content? Not really. I'm waiting for an explanation.

Pal of Porty · Post by **Pal of Porty** » 18 Dec 2008, 23:34

Bob Jefferson wrote:From a friend:
They (the Greens) put forward an amendment proposing the Viridor site which got no support, so they opposed the main motion.

An accurate summation from where I was sitting, They just threw their rattle out the pram when they did not get their own way.

They are about as Green as a Hearts strip.

Bob Jefferson · Post by **Bob Jefferson** » 18 Dec 2008, 23:35

PoP, Porty, whoever - could you offer us a little of the flavour of today's events for those of us unable to attend? I could do with a little entertainment as I sip my Prosecco.

seanie · Post by **seanie** » 19 Dec 2008, 00:13

I was there in the morning and for the most part it was pretty sombre. Hearing the deputations from the other schools was chastening. Think how we'd feel in their situation and at the end of the day the Council's doesn't appear to have any solution to what's been an urgent problem going back years.

Especially with Boroughmuir. Under the PPP2 scheme they were the most urgent priority but missed out because the Council didn't have a solution. Now they've slipped back as a priority although the Council now seem to accept the refurb option that wasn't considered viable before.

So quite a lot of it was depressing.

But then PPAG came on and, bless 'em, excelled themselves.

Bob Jefferson · Post by **Bob Jefferson** » 19 Dec 2008, 00:16

What were the highlights of the PPAG presentation? Do tell.

Bob Jefferson · Post by **Bob Jefferson** » 19 Dec 2008, 00:30

Oh well, looks like I will have to wait until tomorrow for further details. Sorry I missed it though - I love a bit of lunchtime cabaret.

Cheers to a victory for commonsense.

seanie · Post by **seanie** » 19 Dec 2008, 00:31

The Lismore exchange. You may want to put your glass down and strap yourself in for this.

The PPAG deputation actually claimed that a new high school could be built on the Lismore site without the loss of any green space.

Just as a reminder the preferred optimum site size (excluding playing fields) is 4.5 Ha, the existing PHS site is 2.9 Ha and the built Lismore site is less than 1.3 Ha. So PPAG actually suggested building a new school on a site less than half the size of the existing site, and less than 30% of the optimum.

So when it comes to questions Marilyne Maclaren says something along the lines of 'are you aware the Lismore site is very small that we'd need to build on Bingham Park as well and that was considered and rejected in the consulation for reasons that still apply."

And the response is....(drum roll)...

If you measure all the hardstanding and building area at Lismore....

...and measure the footprint of the buildings at PHS...

...then you'll find you can fit PHS onto the footprint at Lismore!!!

The looks of incredulity from the Councillors was something to behold. I'm guessing pretty much the entire room was united in one common thought;

"Did I really just hear that?"

Bob Jefferson · Post by **Bob Jefferson** » 19 Dec 2008, 00:38

I was just about to call it a night, but thanks for that last laugh. PPAG are obviously keen students of time and relative dimensions in space and their party piece must be pouring a quart into a pint pot.

It's amazing how far wishful thinking alone will take you.

Porty · Post by **Porty** » 19 Dec 2008, 00:41

Bob, i was about to start a blow by blow account but I can't be bothered and it is most definitely move-on time.

Council going ahead with PHS on the park, they are comfortable about common good and have invited, in fact, encouraged legal chellenge. It will make no difference to planning.

There is not a molecule of chance that the preferred location will be re-visisted. NONE.

We are on our way to planning and if we fail;we fail.

Maureen Child called for unity, in a passionate, heartfelt speech. She urged local councillors to be "truthful" about local issues.

I spoke to Stephen Hawkins afterwards and he is quite willing to engage in design and development plans for the new school on the park. He added that the community now had to legally challenge the common good issue and his engagement would be dependent on that. I asked him who he meant by "the community" and there's no answer, so off we went again.

Diana Cairns stood up and unflinchigly spouted a string of lies and falsehhods (see Seanie's post), it is truly disgraceful and all in an attempt to persuade councillors to stand up for her cause. In the end, she convinced noone- not even Stephen Hawkins, who sat on his hands -that is what I call failure to persuade.

Wangi, I think we need another PHS thread. Something like PHS plan and design. Let's leave all the bickering and aggresive argument behind, a lot of which I am guilty of. Let's move on- the site is chosen- the funding is clear but indefinite and we know we can legally build on the park.

We now need to get planning permission and have a "vision" discussion. After this weekend, I am no longer arguing with Ghost or any other PPAG no mark. It is done, it is all about planning, we will see you there. Bring alll you have- in my view it won't be anywhere near enough.

As an aside, spoke to at least 10 councillors today, they said pros and antis were evenly split, with the average number of emails per councillor estimated at 60. That means only 30 of us could be bothered. Personally, considering the prize at stake, I am gutted so few of us stepped up. We simply must do better.

seanie · Post by **seanie** » 19 Dec 2008, 00:56

I think most people are busy just doing what they do. It's not that they don't necessarily care or can't be bothered, they just don't notice things because they've lots of other things that concern them.

I'm not sure how you really tackle that. I think with PHS there may be a possibility of engaging people in the brief development/design procees. There's only so much influence the community could exert but it could make a real difference. As it becomes more tangible people may get more involved.

Bob Jefferson · Post by **Bob Jefferson** » 19 Dec 2008, 11:04

PPAG will undoubtedly continue to oppose the school on Portobello Park with its usual mix of fantasy, wishful thinking and lies, including the suggestion of red herring 'alternative' sites and non-existent threats to the golf course. They are determined to waste a huge sum of money in legal fees in a vain and pointless attempt to fight the planning application and deny local children the school they deserve.

I would like to suggest that they add that money to the thousands of pounds raised from the community still sitting in the PCATS fund and give the whole lot to a deserving charity.

But Porty is right, when it comes to planning and designing our new school in the park we should not be distracted by this nonsense. We need to start thinking positively about the elements that will make this a school we can all be proud of. Time for a new start and a new thread.

Bob Jefferson · Post by **Bob Jefferson** » 19 Dec 2008, 11:21

From today's Scotsman:

Rankin's wife declares war over rundown capital schools

Pal of Porty · Post by **Pal of Porty** » 19 Dec 2008, 11:38

It appeared to me that nearly all the Councillors wanted to build all 5 schools but they just do not have the cash. The deputations from the High Schools were very consistent, fair and supportive of each other, as they have been all the way through this exercise. PHS acknowledged that it was only by a very fine margin that they were getting the cash first and urged the council to try and find the cash for the other schools.

However as the council do not have any more cash...cue the Councillors getting wired into each other for over an hour. It is basically blaming each other for the situation SNP slagging PPP, Labour slagging of the Scottish No-Futures Trust etc. At one point in the afternoon even Inverness Airport was getting the blame?????

Across all this however, I think the majority of the chamber were always going to vote for the motion as one school is better than none and it just so happened that the Prioritisation report placed PHS at the top. This report has been what has really cemented PHS going ahaead.

One of the highlights of the day for me, apart from getting the school, was PPAG's green crudentials being shot to flames by some Councillors, and the laugh at the suggestion of building on Lismore's foorprint (a 14 storey school?). Facts have never been PPAG's currency.

Councillor Hawkins abstained from the vote which disappointed me. Anyone who can immediately call for 'the community' to raise money to fight this decison 2 minutes after it has been made - while not having the cajones to vote against it - well, make you own mind up.

Overall a difficult decision has been made and it is now time for the exciting bit. Can we really get the chance to make it something special or will it just be another new building?

Bob Jefferson · Post by **Bob Jefferson** » 19 Dec 2008, 12:22

So having toyed with building a school on just about every park (except the well-loved Portobello Park of course) within a 2 mile radius, PPAG settled on Bingham Park, while simultaneously announcing that it would not involve the loss of any green space, a remarkable piece of doublethink by anyone's standards.

Carrying on the 1984 theme, I am reminded of the moment that Winston is facing his worst nightmare in Room 101.

"Do it to Julia!" he cries in desperation. That's PPAG. Do it to any park, just not mine.

And that's my parting shot. I'm concentrating on the positive now.

Bob Jefferson · Post by **Bob Jefferson** » 19 Dec 2008, 15:36

But it's not easy....

From Fantasy Island, sorry, today's EN Letters Page:

Another option exists for school

Bob Jefferson · Post by **Bob Jefferson** » 19 Dec 2008, 16:04

From our new friend, Marilyne MacLaren:

Now, who was calling for her resignation?

Porty · Post by **Porty** » 19 Dec 2008, 16:26

The other wave 3 schools were incredibly gracious. Respect is due. - one of their reps, boro or Gillespira' informed us that they had received an anonymous letter encouraging their school to rail against phs getting all the money. From memory there was a post similar lines on the en. The letter was treated with the contempt it deserved.

Bob Jefferson · Post by **Bob Jefferson** » 19 Dec 2008, 20:18

Update on earlier story (with new comment section):

Rebus author's wife slams council for poor state of schools

Porty · Post by **Porty** » 19 Dec 2008, 21:51

Bob Jefferson wrote:From our new friend, Marilyne MacLaren:

Now, who was calling for her resignation?

God - what I wrote looked pretty bad, sorry.

Bob Jefferson · Post by **Bob Jefferson** » 20 Dec 2008, 12:24

Don't worry, I think the few people who saw it understood that it was an exhortation of celebration, inspired by what I assume was your office party?

Porty · Post by **Porty** » 20 Dec 2008, 12:44

It was indeed,. Still out of order tho- but hey look at this picture- its incredible- how did they do that?

http://www.portygreenkeepers.org.uk/mcl ... nov08.html

Bob Jefferson · Post by **Bob Jefferson** » 20 Dec 2008, 12:53

You mean the picture of Marilyne? Or the image of Portobello Park, which portrays it as a sylvan glen? Do they have something in common? Is it that they have both been digitally enhanced to make them appear more attractive than they actually are?

Bob Jefferson · Post by **Bob Jefferson** » 20 Dec 2008, 13:32

From today's EN Letters Page:

Accept defeat and be more positive

Porty · Post by **Porty** » 20 Dec 2008, 13:44

Bob Jefferson wrote:You mean the picture of Marilyne? Or the image of Portobello Park, which portrays it as a sylvan glen? Do they have something in common? Is it that they have both been digitally enhanced to make them appear more attractive than they actually are?

You don't think PPAG are deploying a veneer that masks the truth, do you?

Porty · Post by **Porty** » 20 Dec 2008, 13:46

Bob Jefferson wrote:Update on earlier story (with new comment section):

Rebus author's wife slams council for poor state of schools

What did AW say? Think its been removed.

Bob Jefferson · Post by **Bob Jefferson** » 20 Dec 2008, 13:58

Yes, I reported it as unsuitable. Let's just say that it wasn't a very lady-like comment and certainly not fit for repetition on this forum, but in essence she disagreed with the findings that PHS was most in need of replacement and felt that the only reason we came top was because PFANS supporters were in league with Council officials. Or words to that effect.

Porty · Post by **Porty** » 20 Dec 2008, 14:06

Ah- very similar to DC Cairns who informed the entire council chamber thatPortobello High School had come first in the condition and suitability survey based on a "false premise". Ironically, the other Wave 3 schools, who all lost out, made no such allegation.

So there you have it; a self proclaimed community leader trying to derail the new high school that will benefit the children of our community, amongst many others. Totally shameful isn't it?