'Portable cabins are not the answer' to Southgate primary school crisis (From Enfield Independent)

Correction: Walker Parent Action Group petition in excess of 1200! I am hopeful that there will be no need for a recourse to PortaKabins at West Grove. A 'redesigned' classroom should surely be feasible and more appropriate given the ancilliary rooms there? I am relieved for the local children who will now be able to take up a place at an excellent local Southgate school with the space and facilities to safely welcome them and ensure a bright start to their education. Longer-term, I trust Enfield Council will now act swiftly to ensure the properly planned permanent expansion of Walker Primary to ensure that similar crises are averted in the very near future.

Whilst I agree that portacabins are not the ideal solution for teaching our children, they are a far better solution than having no place at all, or being sent to an unacceptable school that is miles away from your home. I am obviously speaking as a parent of a 4 year old who has not been offered a place for September that is either local or acceptable and I have been fighting for additional primary places in Southgate.

I am very disappointed in the attitude of many schools, including Walker and West Grove. Why are they so determined to make this incredibly stressful time even more difficult for families who simply want a place at a local school for their children?

I am especially dissapointed in the hypocrisy that says that forcing a bulge on Walker is unacceptable, but it's ok to do it to West Grove. Really?

Why are we constantly pushing at closed doors? We have 4 year olds who have the right to an education in a decent community school. This dreadful situation desperately needs sorting out.

Rachel, as you already know from our discussions and the deputation, Walker has the same number on roll yet is approximately 1/3 the size of West Grove - and is already at double its capacity! It couldn't have coped with the extra strain - that is hardly hypocrisy? There is no comparison between the two schools in terms of space, facilities and resources. Had Enfield expanded the school in 2007 when asked, you wouldn't be 'pushing at closed doors' either. It's time to stop pointing the finger of blame at Walker now. It's worth remembering that, had Ayfer Orhan not stated in the press (before even visiting the school incidentally) "I would put a bulge class at Walker immediately. The head says they don’t have room for a bulge, but I disagree, it’s a difference of opinion" I wonder if Jo would have been so brazen in publicly disputing the Head Teachers judgement and demanding an independent evaluation? Particularly,as your own petition blog suggests "At Walker Primary School the hard work of the teaching staff, and also the input of local parents, has been consistent in achieving an ‘outstanding’ ranking in the school league tables." Unfortunately your campaign forgot this somewhere along the way and cast Walker and its parents in a very negative light. Having thus offended the Leadership, staff and families here, our faith and trust in our local community has been shattered. It may take many, many years to recover. And all because a few local families felt it was their absolute right to gain a place here, at any cost - even if it meant 'forcing' a class on the most overcrowded school in the area! I'll rephrase your question Rachel and ask you; Why are you so determined to make this incredibly stressful time even more difficult for the families here? Where is the trust?

I agree that the lack of planning by Enfield Council is quite shocking. The birthrate has been on the increase since the late 1990, but the Council maintains that the figures they were given did not reflect reality and that they got caught unaware by the rising need for primary school places. Well, now that they know, let's hope they get the secondary school places sorted out in time.

I agree that there should not be a need for portacabins at any school. Unlike Walker Primary, West Grove Primary has ancillary rooms (music room, art room or drama room, according to its own website) that could be "re-designed" as a classroom (at least in the interim), so that any additional pupils would feel included in school life. West Grove has substantially more internal space (7.37m2 per pupil) than Walker Primary (4.60m2 per pupil) and a much larger playing field. Therefore, it seems to me that West Grove is a far more suitable site for a bulge class than Walker, which is already bursting at the seems and simply cannot squeeze more children in and guarantee their safety.
This should, however, should not detract from that fact that Enfield Council need to take a long hard look at their strategy for primary and secondary school places to ensure that the current shortfall remains a one-off and does not become the norm.

I would think that actually getting Enfield Council to sort out the long term situation in Southgate Schools is something that the community could unite on. We need Walker rebuilt with extra land to take on more pupils, we need non-faith schools (St Monica's and St Andrew's) to stop discriminating in entry criteria and we need all schools in the area brought up to an "Outstanding" standard. Its Enfield Council's responsibility, but it appears that parent power will need to be pushing and kicking them all the way!!

The council need to begin work with immediate effect so that these issues don't drag on for subsequent years.

Of course, it is natural for parents to be concerned of only their own child's education, and not think of the wider view. It is up to the council to make the best decisions for the community, within various restrictions.

The shortage of places for genuinely local families is down to the admissions cheats. They claim residence for a short term close the school, then move back to their previous residence shortly afterwards. Many people have admitted this to us. We are not talking about people who move large distances - perhaps only a mile or two - but they are still cheating the system. As the rules stand, they only have to be resident on the day they apply for a place. Most reasonable people would agree to be resident only on the day, with no intention of living there for the long term, is cheating, even if it is just the 'right side' of the rules.

What is most shocking is that the Walker Parents Action Group will not condemn the actions of these cheats - they see it as 'market forces'.

Most of the cheats rent properties close to school, and push up the rents for genuinely renting families. The congestion caused by these 'commuters' is horrendous - both for drop-off and pick-up - especially when you take into account that the 'catchment area' for Walker has been walking-distance for a number of years.

Regarding children being 'forced to work in corridors' - I have a statement from the headteacher of Walker saying that 'all children are accommodated in classrooms'. What is the truth?

leeatkinson wrote:
Of course, it is natural for parents to be concerned of only their own child's education, and not think of the wider view. It is up to the council to make the best decisions for the community, within various restrictions.

The shortage of places for genuinely local families is down to the admissions cheats. They claim residence for a short term close the school, then move back to their previous residence shortly afterwards. Many people have admitted this to us. We are not talking about people who move large distances - perhaps only a mile or two - but they are still cheating the system. As the rules stand, they only have to be resident on the day they apply for a place. Most reasonable people would agree to be resident only on the day, with no intention of living there for the long term, is cheating, even if it is just the 'right side' of the rules.

What is most shocking is that the Walker Parents Action Group will not condemn the actions of these cheats - they see it as 'market forces'.

Most of the cheats rent properties close to school, and push up the rents for genuinely renting families. The congestion caused by these 'commuters' is horrendous - both for drop-off and pick-up - especially when you take into account that the 'catchment area' for Walker has been walking-distance for a number of years.

Regarding children being 'forced to work in corridors' - I have a statement from the headteacher of Walker saying that 'all children are accommodated in classrooms'. What is the truth?

@Lee Atkinson: The delicious irony about the appalling online smear campaign you have conducted against Walker parents, particularly your use of Twitter to broadcast libellous remarks about WPAG supporting cheats even from the Council Chamber, is that it will have been seen by every decision maker present at the deputation meeting from the Chief Executive down.

There is no doubt that it has provided prima facie evidence to the Council that this issue has divided the N14 community to such an unfixable degree that situating a bulge class at Walker is a completely untenable proposition at every level.

So thanks, Lee Atkinson! Never thought I'd say that but you have single-handedly done a brilliant job of making our case for us.

Susan Lisle

Dear Mr Atkinson, I agree with you that there are some people who take up temporary residence near the school in order to get offered a place. I agree that this is morally wrong. However, as the rules are at the moment, this is not illegal or fraudulent. There are many reasons why people move (or indeed drive to school) and it is not for us to assume what their motives are or punish those children who may already be going through hard times. In any case, it is up to the Council, who have their systems and procedures to pursue truly fraudulent applications and do withdraw places where a breach of the rules is proven. However, I feel that the issue of a few people working the system detracts from the real issue here, and that is that the head teacher of Walker school says she cannot guarantee the safety and well-being of an 30 additional children, were they placed in her care. That is the crux of the matter: as it stands, Walker cannot safely accommodate a bulge class. I believe that a two-pronged approach by the Council is needed to address the current shortage in a safe manner and in such a way that all the children are offered a start they deserve to their life at school (and not a portacabin in a car park). I (and I speak as an individual here, not as a member of any pressure group) do believe that this can be achieved with a bulge class, not at Walker Primary, but at West Grove Primary instead. I understand that you want what you think is the best for your child, and I understand your frustration with the system. I am not proposing to leave the children at West Grove, where they could be in a proper classroom and part of a good school (West Grove has both more modern facilities and larger grounds than Walker), but what I would like to see is the expansion of Walker school to a three-form entry, and when that is done, the class could be moved to Walker in its entirety. That way, you get the school you want in your local area (albeit with a bit of a delay due to lack foresight and planning on the Council's behalf), and the safety and well-being of all the children can be guaranteed. I do not agree with blanket accusations based on hear-say.

SLisle wrote:

leeatkinson wrote:
Of course, it is natural for parents to be concerned of only their own child's education, and not think of the wider view. It is up to the council to make the best decisions for the community, within various restrictions.

The shortage of places for genuinely local families is down to the admissions cheats. They claim residence for a short term close the school, then move back to their previous residence shortly afterwards. Many people have admitted this to us. We are not talking about people who move large distances - perhaps only a mile or two - but they are still cheating the system. As the rules stand, they only have to be resident on the day they apply for a place. Most reasonable people would agree to be resident only on the day, with no intention of living there for the long term, is cheating, even if it is just the 'right side' of the rules.

What is most shocking is that the Walker Parents Action Group will not condemn the actions of these cheats - they see it as 'market forces'.

Most of the cheats rent properties close to school, and push up the rents for genuinely renting families. The congestion caused by these 'commuters' is horrendous - both for drop-off and pick-up - especially when you take into account that the 'catchment area' for Walker has been walking-distance for a number of years.

Regarding children being 'forced to work in corridors' - I have a statement from the headteacher of Walker saying that 'all children are accommodated in classrooms'. What is the truth?

@Lee Atkinson: The delicious irony about the appalling online smear campaign you have conducted against Walker parents, particularly your use of Twitter to broadcast libellous remarks about WPAG supporting cheats even from the Council Chamber, is that it will have been seen by every decision maker present at the deputation meeting from the Chief Executive down.

There is no doubt that it has provided prima facie evidence to the Council that this issue has divided the N14 community to such an unfixable degree that situating a bulge class at Walker is a completely untenable proposition at every level.

So thanks, Lee Atkinson! Never thought I'd say that but you have single-handedly done a brilliant job of making our case for us.

Susan Lisle

I have never said that the WPAG support the cheats.

Why do you insist on personal attacks and accusations, not only at me and other parents, but also members of the council and its staff? Do you think that's a constructive way for a solution to be found?

@leeatkinson...er, actually you have said that. With boring repetition *Yaaaawwwn* Every time you pop up on here, or on our blog or on twitter it’s the same old story; blah, blah, blah, cheats, blah, renters, blah WPAG won't condemn, blah, I know lots of them, blah, traffic from miles away, blah, kids not smart enough to pass entrance exams/parents not rich enough, blah, blah, blah.

YOU JUST DON'T LISTEN - do you?

Fact #1: Spending over the odds on a house in Oakfield Road does not guarantee a place at Walker. (you're in the public domain, btw)

Fact #2: 40% of London families rent. Some of these live closer to the school than you do. Get over it.

Fact #3: The Head Teacher doesn’t issue statements, so what on earth you are talking about here is anyone’s guess. Yep, of course they all have allocated classrooms. And for the UMPTEENTH time, it is small group/special needs work that happens in the corridor. Sheesh!

Fact #4: Listen to Susan. The entire Council, Press readership, Walker school staff and parents have been following your rants, insults and downright lies.We are unlikely to be rolling out the red carpet for you any time soon.

Fact #5: You are an aggressive, unpleasant, bitter little man. Please crawl back under the rock from whence you came…

How's that for a 'personal attack', hmm? Bit rich accusing us of that at this stage oh and: Re; Constructive: Pot, kettle, black?
Thought you might like a taste of your own medicine - for a change.

leeatkinson says above "I have never said that the WPAG support the cheats."

I refer you to your tweet from 20th June: "Lee Atkinson ‏@leeatkinson 20 Jun
@WPAG2012 at least you have finally shown your true colours. You do, in fact, support the cheats."

My case rests....

Walker Mum wrote:
@leeatkinson...er, actually you have said that. With boring repetition *Yaaaawwwn* Every time you pop up on here, or on our blog or on twitter it’s the same old story; blah, blah, blah, cheats, blah, renters, blah WPAG won't condemn, blah, I know lots of them, blah, traffic from miles away, blah, kids not smart enough to pass entrance exams/parents not rich enough, blah, blah, blah.

YOU JUST DON'T LISTEN - do you?

Fact #1: Spending over the odds on a house in Oakfield Road does not guarantee a place at Walker. (you're in the public domain, btw)

Fact #2: 40% of London families rent. Some of these live closer to the school than you do. Get over it.

Fact #3: The Head Teacher doesn’t issue statements, so what on earth you are talking about here is anyone’s guess. Yep, of course they all have allocated classrooms. And for the UMPTEENTH time, it is small group/special needs work that happens in the corridor. Sheesh!

Fact #4: Listen to Susan. The entire Council, Press readership, Walker school staff and parents have been following your rants, insults and downright lies.We are unlikely to be rolling out the red carpet for you any time soon.

Fact #5: You are an aggressive, unpleasant, bitter little man. Please crawl back under the rock from whence you came…

How's that for a 'personal attack', hmm? Bit rich accusing us of that at this stage oh and: Re; Constructive: Pot, kettle, black?
Thought you might like a taste of your own medicine - for a change.

Actually, we moved to the area *before* we knew about Walker school - we did not move to here to 'guarantee' a school place. So that's another accusation made.

Believe what you like, but I am in possession of a statement from the Headteacher, and I believe her. It is the campaign by the WPAG, along with sensationalist photos provided to the press, that state that they are 'forced' to work in corridors, despite many parents know that many children in many schools are given time in small groups in corridors and other rooms.

I'm not bitter - I'm sad that our community won't get the school it deserves but I'm glad that my child won't now be going there.

sanjaymaz wrote:
leeatkinson says above "I have never said that the WPAG support the cheats."

I refer you to your tweet from 20th June: "Lee Atkinson ‏@leeatkinson 20 Jun
@WPAG2012 at least you have finally shown your true colours. You do, in fact, support the cheats."

My case rests....

Apologies I did say that.

But lets be clear, you will not condemn them will you? I have ask you many times. You support them as it is 'market forces'?

leeatkinson wrote:

Walker Mum wrote:
@leeatkinson...er, actually you have said that. With boring repetition *Yaaaawwwn* Every time you pop up on here, or on our blog or on twitter it’s the same old story; blah, blah, blah, cheats, blah, renters, blah WPAG won't condemn, blah, I know lots of them, blah, traffic from miles away, blah, kids not smart enough to pass entrance exams/parents not rich enough, blah, blah, blah.

YOU JUST DON'T LISTEN - do you?

Fact #1: Spending over the odds on a house in Oakfield Road does not guarantee a place at Walker. (you're in the public domain, btw)

Fact #2: 40% of London families rent. Some of these live closer to the school than you do. Get over it.

Fact #3: The Head Teacher doesn’t issue statements, so what on earth you are talking about here is anyone’s guess. Yep, of course they all have allocated classrooms. And for the UMPTEENTH time, it is small group/special needs work that happens in the corridor. Sheesh!

Fact #4: Listen to Susan. The entire Council, Press readership, Walker school staff and parents have been following your rants, insults and downright lies.We are unlikely to be rolling out the red carpet for you any time soon.

Fact #5: You are an aggressive, unpleasant, bitter little man. Please crawl back under the rock from whence you came…

How's that for a 'personal attack', hmm? Bit rich accusing us of that at this stage oh and: Re; Constructive: Pot, kettle, black?
Thought you might like a taste of your own medicine - for a change.

Actually, we moved to the area *before* we knew about Walker school - we did not move to here to 'guarantee' a school place. So that's another accusation made.

Believe what you like, but I am in possession of a statement from the Headteacher, and I believe her. It is the campaign by the WPAG, along with sensationalist photos provided to the press, that state that they are 'forced' to work in corridors, despite many parents know that many children in many schools are given time in small groups in corridors and other rooms.

I'm not bitter - I'm sad that our community won't get the school it deserves but I'm glad that my child won't now be going there.

@Lee Atkinson: "I'm not bitter - I'm sad that our community won't get the school it deserves but I'm glad that my child won't now be going there."

Given that you have just outed yourself as a straight up and down liar and have let both your child and family down with your reprehensible conduct online towards the Walker school community, it's probably for the best.

@SLisle - I'm forgetful, yes, but not a liar. That tweet was part of a conversation in which you confirmed that you would not condemn cheats.

At least I will apologise - will you now apologise for all the false accusations that you have made?

Is all this really necessary? The stream of messages above is extremely upsetting and I realise this is only one of many increasingly unpleasant dialogues that have gone back and forth.

Lee and I have also had disagreements on e-mail in the past, but I can assure you that he is not an 'aggressive, unpleasant and bitter little man' and to be honest yor response is viscious and unnecessary and I hope you feel ashamed of what you wrote. Personally, I don't believe that WPAG 'support' the cheats, but I also do not see anything in your compaign to demand that the council eradicate them.

We have very clear differences in opinion and I don't think that we will ever agree but this level of personal attack on both sides has got to stop. It gets neither side anywhere and simply adds to the level of stress and animosity in the community.

Please will everyone just calm down and take a breath before you post again.

@LeeAtkinson As you have said Lee, you are forgetful so you may have forgotten that WPAG actually have openly condemned the cheats a number of times. e.g. via a twitter exchange with you on 16th June; "WPAG Condemns ALL fraudulent applications in the school through falsified residency claims. Renting however, is NOT cheating"
& @Rachel Kelly: As you know, I have had reason to complain to you about Lee before as I felt he was damaging your campaign with his attacks on WPAG and Walker. I think the comments above are borne out of a frustration that this seems to be continuing and it has been very difficult for parents at the school to endure such a sustained barrage of insults and accusations, some of which have been very personal indeed. (although not on this particular news article but on previous ones!) I am not condoning this behaviour though and I agree that animosity has no place in this debate. I genuinely hope that a West Grove bulge class will be the compromise solution that we are all comfortable with. For the sake of all of our children.

@ISallas - Many peoples' definition of cheats are wider than the legal definition (that of being resident on the day of application). I accept that you condemn those who aren't resident at the address on the day of application, but your views have been that it is acceptable for people to reside at that address for a very short term in order to get the place.

As I have stated many times, I do not believe that renting is cheating - however, renting is a method that cheats use and make it harder for families to rent in the area as the rents are pushed higher.

I understand that it is very difficult and costly to prevent this wider definition of cheating (how does one know what someone's intention is?), but wouldn't you agree that a better admissions system is required - one that doesn't discriminate people based on the distance from their local school, whether they rent or own their home, what religion they are, how much money they have, and what they are prepared to do in order to get a place? It is, after all, supposed to be a universal education system. Otherwise, it becomes a race to get the closest address to all good schools.

Having met with LA last night I would like to comment on the School option not mentioned much. De Bohn!
Past performance and reputations change, and De Bohn is an excellent school now with a Ofsted Good rating. In fact in Reception it enjoys an Outstanding rating and the position that teachers from around the borough attend training at De Bohn to see how this is achieved.
De Bohn has more outdoor space than either Westgrove and Walker and available classrooms recently vacated by London Borough of Enfield officers.
There are no parking restrictions at De Bohn and the journey times are the same as reaching Westgrove from Southgate Green. There is nothing wrong with this excellent school that has not been promoted by the local authority.
Chase Road in Southgate has 3 Schools on it. There is a planned CPZ for Chelmsford Road and a new development approaching completion.
For practical reasons putting Porta cabins at Westgrove will have an affect on the area, residents, parents, the pupils in the school, those planning to attend and all due to poor planning.
Putting the children first is key. Better choices are available.
Westgrove given 3 weeks to prepare is not good enough or long enough and will have an impact directly on the Foundation stage.

Hi Daniel - actually WPAG did ask the LA to look at DeBohun but were led to believe that it was beyond the 2 mile limit for most of the families in this area? And I agree, a cohort of motivated, engaged families may be just what the doctor ordered there! Unfortunately the Press Article above seems to suggest that a legal case would be brought if DeBohun was offered though? Although DeBohun is the largest school in the borough, West Grove is positively gigantic when compared to Walker though! West Grove is fortunate in having Art, Drama and IT rooms as well as two large halls so, whilst there will be some juggling around of accommodation there, it would be a much more viable proposition for the interim. (especially as Walker is the smallest, most overcrowded school in Southgate; already has 5 portakabins on site; 4 playground water fountains shared between 422 children; no ancilliary rooms at all (not even a library or separate dining area) and not an inch of free space! It's awful that Enfield are taking so long to sort out provision in the Southgate area but I really hope that West Grove will be able to step in and extend a welcome to these children very soon.

I find it very upsetting how people can be so vicious in their personal attacks. It's so unneccessary. Calling someone names just because they have a different opinion to you on 1 point only, (whether abusing the admissions rules to get a place is wrong) is a horrible way to act. I feel really ashamed of the people living in this neighbourhood. Six months ago
I thought this was a lovely place to live because of the local people and I couldn't wait for my child to go to the local school and make friends. But now I feel so fortunate that she won't be. If parents can't have a debate without resorting to childish name calling what hope is there for the children to behave in an appropriate manner.

Danielp1 wrote:
Having met with LA last night I would like to comment on the School option not mentioned much. De Bohn!
Past performance and reputations change, and De Bohn is an excellent school now with a Ofsted Good rating. In fact in Reception it enjoys an Outstanding rating and the position that teachers from around the borough attend training at De Bohn to see how this is achieved.
De Bohn has more outdoor space than either Westgrove and Walker and available classrooms recently vacated by London Borough of Enfield officers.
There are no parking restrictions at De Bohn and the journey times are the same as reaching Westgrove from Southgate Green. There is nothing wrong with this excellent school that has not been promoted by the local authority.
Chase Road in Southgate has 3 Schools on it. There is a planned CPZ for Chelmsford Road and a new development approaching completion.
For practical reasons putting Porta cabins at Westgrove will have an affect on the area, residents, parents, the pupils in the school, those planning to attend and all due to poor planning.
Putting the children first is key. Better choices are available.
Westgrove given 3 weeks to prepare is not good enough or long enough and will have an impact directly on the Foundation stage.

Daniel. Please check your facts. De Bohun has a "Satisfactory" rating, in it's June 2011 Ofsted roprt and on attainment it is rated "Poor"

Danielp1 wrote:
Having met with LA last night I would like to comment on the School option not mentioned much. De Bohn!
Past performance and reputations change, and De Bohn is an excellent school now with a Ofsted Good rating. In fact in Reception it enjoys an Outstanding rating and the position that teachers from around the borough attend training at De Bohn to see how this is achieved.
De Bohn has more outdoor space than either Westgrove and Walker and available classrooms recently vacated by London Borough of Enfield officers.
There are no parking restrictions at De Bohn and the journey times are the same as reaching Westgrove from Southgate Green. There is nothing wrong with this excellent school that has not been promoted by the local authority.
Chase Road in Southgate has 3 Schools on it. There is a planned CPZ for Chelmsford Road and a new development approaching completion.
For practical reasons putting Porta cabins at Westgrove will have an affect on the area, residents, parents, the pupils in the school, those planning to attend and all due to poor planning.
Putting the children first is key. Better choices are available.
Westgrove given 3 weeks to prepare is not good enough or long enough and will have an impact directly on the Foundation stage.

Daniel. Please check your facts. De Bohun has a "Satisfactory" rating, in it's June 2011 Ofsted roprt and on attainment it is rated "Poor"

Sorry, please find the Ofsted report grades for the Early Years Foundation Stage at DeBohun Primary.
Over this school like all schools are constantly working on improvement. In Foundation they are as good as it gets.

Overall effectiveness of the Early Years Foundation Stage:1 Outstanding

Taking into account: Outcomes for children in the Early Years Foundation Stage:1 Outstanding

The quality of provision in the Early Years Foundation Stage:
1 Outstanding

The effectiveness of leadership and management of the Early Years Foundation Stage:
1 Outstanding

Views of parents and carers
Most parents and carers who responded to the parental questionnaire are supportive of the school and are happy with their child's experience at the school and with what it provides for them. The few parental concerns related to the school helping parents and carers to support their child's learning and informing them about their child's progress. Inspectors consider that the school has significantly improved its systems for engaging parents and carers with their child's progress as a result of stronger tracking and closer monitoring of pupils' progress.

There is nothing wrong with this school, and going back to the original point of whether a school has suitable places, then yes it has.
It may not be a personal first choice for some people, but fundamentally it is the best and most available option. It is local in Southgate, and most importantly the School is keen and willing to take the children offering much needed places.

Daniel P.... Yes De Bohun is a nice school and will be suitable for some parents when they are offered a place. However unfortunately for others if the parent dropping off the child works in London and commutes via public transport it is not a viable option. It would be too difficult to find childminders who live near the school who will accept the children so early in the morning.

Daniel P.... Yes De Bohun is a nice school and will be suitable for some parents when they are offered a place. However unfortunately for others if the parent dropping off the child works in London and commutes via public transport it is not a viable option. It would be too difficult to find childminders who live near the school who will accept the children so early in the morning.

Actually there is a breakfast club at de bohun 7.45 start, perfect to get on the tube by 8. I feel some southgate green parents feel de bohun is not good enough for their kids. There are some serious class issues here and I am disappointed to see that the council ever played along with this game. Schools like de bohun will never havebthe opportunity to improve if the southgate parents refuse to send their children there. I wonder if these same parents will be campaigning for a bulge class at broomfield (their closest secondary)? I also wonder how many of these parents who claim de bohun is too far, placed grange park, eversly and merryhills as their preferences? If they did, there are absolutely no grounds for legal action as the distance argument falls short.

I would like to respond to some of the comments in the above. I am not spoiling for a fight, but just don't feel that the parents without school places are being fairly represented.

In terms of the rating at De Bohun; the foundation years are excellent. But you really need to read the entire report in order to get a full feel of the school. The overall rating is satisfactory. The key reason for this is that the overall outcomes for children at the school are well below the average. They may start brilliantly, but the level of pupil mobility makes it impossible for the school to achieve a higher rating. I have no fight with the school, how can they achieve the same level of attainment as other schools when a quarter of the pupils leave each year and are replaced by many non english speaking children? But they admitted to me on my tour of the school that the children who remain at the school are affected by the above average turnover and the fact that the teachers are always trying to bring the new children up to the level of the rest of the class.
So, please do not accuse me of holding up the 'class' card. Class has nothing to do with it. My issue is based on the fact that in the long term my child will not thrive as well in this school as in others.

In terms of distance, De Bohun and West Grove are not comparable in terms of commute from southgate green. There is 1 single decker bus that goes only every 20 mins to DB which will only take 1 pram in busy times. How do you propose we move the 30 kids from the Green with all their younger siblings at that time in the morning? West Grove is not much better, but at least it is a double decker bus that runs every 9 mins.

Finally to the bulge class, I am astonished that De Bohun is even being considered for this. Enfield council have so far taken the position that they want to expand schools that are good or outstanding. DB may have the space, but it just sounds like people are just trying to shift us further from our homes and communities to a school that has a heap of issues that it needs to address before taking on yet more pupils.

I don't know whether anyone will even read this post given the new article, but I hope you do and that you understand the highly distressing position that we families are in. Have our children done something wrong that has made them so unwanted by any of our local schools? This year there is a crisis and while none of us want this last minute push on local schools, we need places for our children. Please will a decent Southgate school help us and not just keep closing their doors.

What on earth are the legal grounds for challenging De Bohun? It sounds like parents wanting to send their children to an "outstanding" school and throwing a paddy because they can't. it is clearly not viable to add a bulge class to the current facilities at Walker and West Grove have refused so what are the council to do? I agree with the contributor who wondered at the distance of the other choices some parents included when applying! De Bohun might be "satisfactory" due to low attainment but I would rather schools were judged on PROGRESS. If you have high EAL, SEN and mobility then attainment is likely to lower than nationally expected levels, that does not mean that children are not making accelerated progress year on year to close the gap (and in fact the ofsted specifies that this is the case). As a parent and a teacher (not in the Southgate area) I understand the desire to send your child to the best school possible and one that is within a convenient distance but the expectations of some are unrealistic in this current predicament. Unfortunately there is little choice these days and many people in all areas of London are having to accept school places that do not meet their expectations.

About 17 years ago I moved from Edmonton to Enfield. I moved on a Thursday, visited the local primary school on the Friday and my child started attendence there the following Monday.

How things have changed.