I'm sorry, you haven't answered my question there at all. What exactly do you know about the 'connections' of these campaigners, to which you alluded?

I have answered the question as much as I'm going to!

So you know nothing at all about their connections. That doesn't surprise me at all as you have never met any of them. I have met all of them.
It is one thing to state your opposition to the campaign and the broader free school programme. Quite right too! Keep these people on their toes, they bear a grave responsibility. For what it is worth they know it.
However it is quite another thing to make baseless insinuations against the integrity of individuals. Risky ground.
So what if the leader of the campaign is a journalist? As far as I am aware they have the same rights and duties as the rest of us. And not all journalists take tea with David Cameron every week. She may be the editor of the Times Educational Supplement, but, on the other hand she may be a back-bench sub editor on the Pig Breeder's Gazette.

Dear Bill , I didn't say I knew nothing about the campaigners. I might do but do you really think it's appropriate to put personal details on here?
In addition I don't understand your problem. I said the campaign was led by a journalist and people with connections . I can't see how that's challenging anyone sintegrity but each to his/her own I suppose.

I can't comprehend why the fact that the people behind this fantastic initiative are professionals has any weight against their campaign? In my eyes, this can only be but a good thing. The mere fact that they are professionals but ultimately parents who are driven to act as they are because they are highly dissatisfied with the options available to their young children regarding state maintained, formal education in their area.

All schools whether they are state maintained or from the private sector will fall upon the skills and back ground of the parents of which their children attend.

This initiative is combining all of that but at the beginning of opening a new school.

I take my hat off to all the organiser's involved. They have worked so hard for something they believe in and they haven't been motivated by money as they haven't been given a penny for all their efforts so far.

Holding down a full time job and meeting the needs of a young family is just about enough for most of us, but the organiser's of this venture are working 24/7 for something they believe will not only impact their own children's educational experience but others too.

It's not as if a look at their web site and then LinkedIn won't tell you everything you need to know about the careers of people involved. It is hardly a secret and should quickly prove that they are normal people who are not party political or any other concerns that people may have.

I think that we are lucky to be able to have a debate to see if a new school in the area is required, whether run by the LEA, churches, a Montessori free school, or another type of community run free school. My key concern is that my daughter has a choice to go to an inclusive state school close to home in a few years time, preferably one that still has some playgrounds left rather than three storeys of portacabins. Every year we hear about plans for more extensions to existing schools and there has to come a point where the facilities available per pupil are less than they were when I attend a local primary school.

All I want is for you to explain precisely what you meant by this line, which you posted here just yesterday?

"This campaign is very impressive but then it is led by journalists and others with connections so thats not surprising either"

Who are these 'others' and what, precisely, are their 'connections'?
There is a very clear insination here which, with all possible respect, you cannot simply gloss over by saying it's not right to post personal details.

The mere fact that these parents feel the need to take this route is testament to the sad and sorry state of affairs regarding education in this country. particularily within your inner city areas.

Why should parents fall on 2nd best options for their children? Why should your son or daughters first year of their education be over shadowed by funding issues? Issues regarding a lack of space in local schools to provide only but the best form of education for children?

Over subscribed schooling....we don't live in a 3rd world country. We shouldn't be forced to accept 2nd best neither.

unfortunately, this initiative is testament to the way forward in education. The organisers behind this venture, if it proves successful will be an icon to other areas of the UK facing exactly the same problems.

If this venture is successful, the people that oppose it now will be the first to brag about it, putting the borough of Lewisham as a shining example to other failing boroughs.

With my PROFESSIONAL experience ( I am a mother, a teacher, a SENCO and I have many other skills too) I wish I could be part of this fantastic venture.

I live in East Sussex and at present we do not have issues regarding primary education to the extent of inner city areas. We do have exactly the same issues regarding secondary education.

I really hope that all the hard work pays off for all the individuals involved and I back it all the way!

I'm intrigued Sarah176. How did you stumble across the se23.com forum?

While it is perfectly understandable that parents are focused on their own children, the problem with the setting up of free schools is that funding will be taken from the mainstream (in our very local area representing very successful primary schools) which can only exacerbate the problems there. It would be good if people with expertise and interest in education could put their skills towards demanding a better education for all of the children. As a society we stand to gain more from enhancing the educational opportunity of the greater number.

Sandy,
I don't think it is that simple when looked at at a local level.

http://www.cypnow.co.uk/news/ByDisciplin...academies/

Lewisham have no plans for new schools, only increasing pupil numbers at existing schools. Funding for local councils is being taken away anyway, but local communities can 'recoup' some of this by setting up free schools which will be centrally funded.

Other local primary schools may also choose to opt out of LEA control, possibly providing a financial boost to that school without providing additional spaces for pupils. My preference would be for money to be spent where it is needed, in catering for an increase in pupil numbers.

The Montessori proposal is interesting because it provides a different style of education, not to every parents' taste, but ideal for others. In my opinion this makes it a more appropriate suggestion for a new school in an area that already has some very high performing LEA and church schools, but still has a projected shortage of places in a few years time.

Yes, but my point is that the funding is removed from the many for the few in niche provision.

I should have added, just look at what's happening with free school proposals in West London and Wandsworth.

I am sorry for insinuating that people are either journalists or are well connected as it must be incredibly upsetting foe them. I don't recall either criticising anyone for being a professional. I think someones grabbed the wrong end of a very large stick here. Sarah176, things are not second best in Lewisham or in se 23. They are very good and some of us want to keep things that way for the majority of kids not just the few.

No. You insinuated that the campaign was 'impressive' because the people running it were well connected. In fact, you did more than insinuate, you stated it baldly. Perish the thought that the campaign could be impressive simply because of hard working people who care deeply about their children and want to give something new a try.
If you can't substantiate any of these supposed connections then shouldn't you withdraw the comment?

Sorry Bill, I'm confused about why you are so rabidly pursuing this point.

I read Roz's original comment as meaning that the campaign was being slickly run because the people involved were connected to professions that were used to ensuring things were slickly run. I don't know what is so sinister about that.

I might be wrong but I thought Roz was asking people to look past the impressive website and flourish of local media attention and look in detail at the issues concerned.

I hardly think I need to set my reasons out again beyond those I have already frequently, indeed perhaps rabidly, posted.
However, I also note your use of the phrase 'slickly presented.'
You could have said 'well presented' or 'professionally presented' but you went with 'slickly.' 'Slick' carries the barest perceptible nuance of sharp practice and the underhand, doesn' it? Gameshow hosts, used car salesmen and yes, dodgy politicians are slick aren't they? Heroes are never slick.
In the end, well, what can I say? The campaign is trying to wring money out of a government committed to the biggest programme of fiscal austerity this country has seen in peacetime. You don't need to be a marketing genius or, God forbid, a journalist, to know that a sloppily presented effort wouldn't stand a chance.

You seem intent on finding whatever meaning you want Bill so go for your life. I have no interest in arguing the toss over nuances in how people perceive various words. Kind of detracts from what was a decent discussion.

Iwasabsolutelyfumings' assessment of what I intended to get across was entirely correct. I do think people ought to read what is written not try to invent hidden agendas and find hidden meanings which don't really exist