School shake-up: 'Bradford has it in for us'

portrayal of the

school shake-up. Here, Oakbank head

John Roberts responds

Where do I start to answer the comments of Councillors McNally and Rooney?

1. Cllr McNally states that 'misconceptions have come forward from people who have no idea of what's going to happen in the Keighley area'.

These people, however, are not KEAG (Keighley Education Action Group) or myself. They are Bradford councillors and the Review team. The history of the Keighley secondary proposals proves this.

The first proposal was for Oakbank to take in 300 students a year and Greenhead 240. When I and others pointed out that their arithmetic was wrong, they accepted this and increased Greenhead's intake to 300, the same as Oakbank. Then - out of the blue - comes the proposal for a secondary school at Parkside at Cullingworth, Oakbank's intake reduces to 270 and Greenhead's goes back to 240.

Is this evidence of a well-though out plan?

Then, only last week, comes the sudden revelation that there will be continued educational use for Bront. Nobody mentioned this before, nobody will say what this use is. Is this evidence of 'knowing what will happen in the Keighley area?' Is this use to be temporary or permanent? It makes a difference but why will nobody tell us? Either they don't know or they're keeping it secret.

2. Cllr McNally says that 'substantial investment' would be needed to update Bront to an 11-18 school. Several times in letters to councillors, the Review Team and the Director of Education, I have asked for comparisons of the costs of upgrading Bront with those of upgrading Parkside. Neither I nor the Keighley News has received an answer. Again, either they don't know or they're keeping the answer secret.

3. Cllr McNally says Bront was 'not a purpose-built secondary school'. I am assured that it was.

4. Cllr McNally is correct when she says Oakbank cannot publish plans for the use of Bront because Bront is owned by the LEA (local education authority). But if Bradford wanted to co-operate then this technical problem would disappear. Similarly, Oakbank owns the Oakbank site and Bradford can only make recommendations for our site. We have simply rejected these recommendations.

If Bradford say we have no choice but to accept their recommendation then let them say so honestly and openly. let's get rid of this charade of consulting.

5. How can everyone 'pull together' when Bradford is pulling Keighley apart?

6. Cllr Rooney is right when she says the Review team came to Oakbank twice. On both occasions they accepted my figures but failed to answer my questions - how will their plan not damage post-16 education in Keighley?

7. Cllr Rooney is guilty of double think. She says: "It is not a question of having to bus children out of Keighley because there are no places for them." But she is reducing the number of places at Oakbank from 350 to 270. This compels more students to leave Keighley, because she has cut down the places.

8. She says she is 'not restricting the preferences of people who live in the Keighley area to schools within the town'. No, she's restricting them to schools out of the town. Oakbank had over 400 first choices last year. There will in future be only 270 places available. Is it 'irresponsible,' as the councillors say, for me to say it? I would say it's irresponsible not to say it.

I believe there is no logical and educational foundation at all for Bradford's plans for secondary education in Keighley. I believe they will seriously damage the town's educational achievement.

Reluctantly, I am forced to admit I think Bradford's got it in for Oakbank. They've never forgiven us for going Grant-Maintained (thereby opting out of council control and being funded directly by the Government) and opting out of their authority.

They resent our initiative. Remember Cllr McNally saying we should not have SRB (Single Regeneration Budget) funding for our anti-truancy project, now it's a model for a Keighley-wide project and a video has been sent to David Blunkett, the Education Minis-ter. Cllr McNally was at Keigh-ley Picture House to see it.

They don't like the fact that the school's recreation centre is now successful after Bradford operated it at a £30,000-a-year loss and had to close it. It is of supreme indifference to Bradford that we are a specialist sports college - one of the few selected in the whole country.

They don't acknowledge we've gradually moved up the Bradford league table for GCSE results and are second only to Ilkley for A-level results.

They don't like the fact that the parents of 400 students make us their first choice.

We know we've still a long way to go and there are lots of ways to improve.

But Bradford would rather level us down. They'll never admit it, of course, but there's plenty of evidence. Sad, isn't it?

Converted for the new archive on 30 June 2000. Some images and formatting may have been lost in the conversion.