Bigger does not mean better for secondary schools

This is not a Ben Rydding issue, it is a fundamental issue to Ilkley as a town, the children within it and the green belt around it.

It is also a key question to the wider Bradford area.

The green belt is absolutely fundamental. It was put there by generations before us for a purpose, to protect the environment; we all have a fundamental duty to protect it for future generations. The green belt may only be violated in the most extreme cases where there is really no choice, this is not the case and there are other options. We must not build on it.

You quote Gillian James about wanting the best for the children of this town and that this is the opportunity of a lifetime. She is absolutely correct. The best interest for the children is not to have 1,950 pupils going through a single road point. The proposed entrance is on an already busy junction. Putting the extra traffic through this area not only risks extreme congestion but considerably increases the risk of vehicle to pedestrian collisions. This is particularly the case when traffic comes under the railway on a piece of single-track road.

A school of this size is not the answer: research suggests that schools should be limited in size to around 1,000 pupils, not increased to 2,000.

This should not be set up as the new Ilkley Grammar School, because it will not be. It will be Wharfedale mega comprehensive. We all want the best for our children, to help them develop in to well balanced adults. For parents, school reports are a key part of this, the Ilkley school report is one side of A4. A smaller school, Ermysted Grammar in Skipton, prepares a booklet for each child with a clear, objective appraisal of progress in each subject. Big may be beautiful, but not when it comes to schools. Parents of Ilkley and the surrounding area should add a crucial question to their checklist of how to choose the best school for their children: What size is it? If you look at private schools, driven by quality, they tend to be around 1,000 pupils or lower. If you look at grammar schools – which are among our best performing state schools – they tend to be around 800 to 1,000 pupils. We have large schools for pragmatic and historical rather than educational reasons.

It is this category that Ilkley Grammar School fits now. Mrs James and her team are to be congratulated on the effort that they put in to help each child achieve their personal best. However, this proposal has partly been driven by the government’s policy of allowing popular schools to expand to satisfy parents driven frantic every year by the dearth of places in good state schools.

There have been issues with children from the schools in Addingham not being able to get into Ilkley. The pressure has come because pupils come to Ilkley from far away, putting undue pressure on numbers. In cases such as this, support and assist the failing school and allow the pupils from Addingham to go to Ilkley. Ilkley Grammar School should stand by its name and be Ilkley Grammar School. If we need to educate the children from the surrounding area then build smaller schools closer to where they are needed.

Finally, the proposal is for a developer to build and run the school for a profitable fee, so called ‘off the book’ debt. We as the taxpayer will fund this.

Last but not least, these proposals are about making Ilkley Grammar School a better place to educate our children. A larger school does not make a better school, the evidence from many sources suggests the reverse is true.

Andrew E Stuart

Wheatley Lane, Ilkley

Fresh call for joined-up thinking in town planning

I am beginning to get the impression that this town has a hard core – or possible large number – of its residents who just don’t like change. If its not Tesco or Craiglands, it must be the proposed new site for the Grammar School.

I have a pretty good knowledge of the current school – all my four children went there and were in receipt of an exceptional education – and one to which I would want to ensure all Bradford children have access. But the school is no longer fit for purpose, and that certainly does not need an expert in school design to confirm. Just take a look.

Additionally the simple ebb and flow of daily activity creates potentially dangerous conditions for us all, located as it is on Cowpasture Road. Like the building itself, it may have been fit for purpose before the car – but no longer is that the case. Traffic generation is a serious problem.

So what about the new site? Clearly there are locational advantages – near the playing fields, away from the town centre. But on green belt land. Green belt is not sacred, simply subject to stringent planning regulation, but can be traded.

What will happen to the old site if the development takes place? Why not do some green belt trading and introduce town centre green belt – OK a bit of a contradiction in terms. Do the same on the former Middle School site which seems to have remained derelict for far too long. Add the two spaces together and some significant green belt trading could take place. (Incidentally we still have Station Road blighted with dereliction following the failure of Tesco to get planning permission.) But of course the Grammar School site will generate major income as housing land!

As I indicated in an earlier letter about the Tesco site, all this requires is a bit of joined-up planning which I failed to see in the Tesco fiasco. Where is this happening – certainly not locally.

The local plan may not have anticipated the current pressures. But that is fine – planning is a dynamic process and should not be fossilised in statutory plans for ever. The current proposal is opportunistic. The Schools for the Future initiative is an opportunity which we cannot afford to miss. Let’s have a bit more joined-up positive thinking so that our politicians don’t have to hide behind public opinion of the minority rather than make bold decisions.

I would wager that if current planning regulation and process had been in place in the Victorian period, the no change brigade would have ensured that the town never got developed!

Howard Green

Obvious reason why new site is being promoted

I am somewhat bemused that residents are overlooking the obvious reason why Bradford Council is promoting a new site for Ilkley Grammar School on green belt land and why it has to be so much larger.

You cannot build new houses in the green belt but you would be able to build houses on the current Ilkley Grammar School site once the School has been relocated.

S Mitchell

Kings Road, Ilkley

Insulting, political claptrap of the worst kind

Those with political ambitions either current MPs or candidates in the forthcoming election must take great care in the way they prepare their arguments. Currently we are seeing these characters bending over backwards to insult our intelligence with political claptrap of the worst kind. I find this insulting as do the majority of voters. A fine example of this is the letter (Gazette, January 21) from Jane Thomas, Labour candidate for Keighley and Ilkley.

The man who will lead her party into the next election is unarguably the worst prime minister the nation has endured in modern times. He has reached his elevated position by also being the worst chancellor probably since records began. He has surrounded himself with ministers who demonstrate their incompetence on a daily basis. There must be some talent in the Labour party but I fail to see it in the slurry of backbenchers.

Perhaps Jane Thomas is the one who will lead us into the political uplands of wisdom and leadership always remembering the saying ‘in the land of the blind the one-eyed man is king’ is not necessarily true. Never mind addressing tax loopholes why not start with potholes in the road and work your way up. Her reference to the banking industry and what has to be done is obvious but she should be reminded that the present Government has had over a year to deal with this and so far has done nothing.

Peter Bye

Park Crescent, Addingham

Level of Government borrowing simply not sustainable

It would be churlish not welcome the fact that, after the longest and deepest recession since the war, our economy is finally moving into growth – albeit by the smallest possible margin of 0.1 per cent.

But Labour’s debt crisis is clearly the greatest threat to this recovery and must be dealt with. The Government currently borrows more in five seconds than the average person in Keighley and Ilkley earns in a year, and this is simply not sustainable.

This year, the UK is expected to borrow almost 14 per cent of our GDP – almost twice as much as when the country nearly went bust under Labour in the 1970s.

The Government is spending more paying off interest on our national debt than on almost anything else. We also have the biggest budget deficit of any large economy in the world and, last month, we had the worst public borrowing figures for any December on record. These are the cold, hard facts of where Gordon Brown’s incompetence, arrogance and mismanagement have left our economy, and we can’t go on like this. This debt must be tackled swiftly and determinedly before it gets even more out of control.

Kris Hopkins

Conservative Parliamentary Candidate for Keighley & Ilkley

What Britain needs is new MPs and competent party

I must congratulate Labour for orchestrating the house-building sector recovery so quickly and for Jane Thomas telling us about this (Letters, January 21). However, the 62 per cent rise in sale reservations by house-builder Taylor Wimpey compared with a year ago follows a low ebb, a worst year in the sector since 1978 on new house-building start-ups.

I concur with the issues raised by Chris Hune of Halton East, Skipton (Letters, January 14). Gordon Brown et al will carry on regardless and not listen to the advice of his MPs, peers or indeed the voters.

Is it just a coincidence that when Labour comes to the end of a term in office that their legacy is a whopping great deficit left for their successors and the weary tax payer to mop up?

Labour presided over the banking and financial services sector. As Chancellor Brown kept reminding us at budget time what great shape the UK economy was in (thanks to him).

The recovery from the appalling position in which the UK finds itself will not be due to Labour but to the hard work and energy of every worker and taxpayer in the country for at least the next seven years until the Labour government borrowings are paid back.

Remember, we are still paying £40 million a day to the EU for the privilege of membership to this exclusive club (27 members). We have contributed to many projects throughout Europe, eg, a new sewer system in Poland and a new underground railway system in Hungary.

A waiting list of prospective new members exists, is this really so surprising?

I urge you to consider these issues at the forthcoming election. Reform and changes to our parliamentary democracy are urgently required to prepare our country for the tasks ahead.

New people as Members of Parliament with a competent party are needed to undertake this challenge in Westminster.

Paul Latham

United Kingdom Independence Party Candidate, Keighley & Ilkley

Thanks to all who gave

On behalf of our President Geoffrey and all the members of the Rotary Club of Ilkley, I wish to express our gratitude for the support we received for the appeal for victims of the Haiti earthquake.

Tesco responded most promptly to our request to hold a collection at the Ilkley store on Tuesday, January 19, and shoppers were extremely generous with their donations.

As a result we were able to raise the magnificent sum of £981.10, enough to purchase two Shelter Boxes to provide a ten-person tent, with sleeping bags, water purification, cooking utensils, crockery and tools.

Kelvin Newberry

Honorary Secretary, Rotary Club of Ilkley