Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!
School funding, winners and losers with latest funding round
The implication in the letter she showed me was that this cut was going to affect schools in wealthier areas like hers (Muswell Hill) and benefit those further east. Anyone know anything about this, or what it means for our local schools?
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by John McMullan on
-
Hooray!!! Well done the council! Engaging in the wealth redistribution that you were created for. Do you really think that the schools in Muswell Hill need this money more?
-
Permalink Reply by 24j0z5fsr8cu2 on
-
well said john...
-
Permalink Reply by Karen Alexander on
-
Alison, I have copied the post from Lynne Featherstone's website which may explain the issue in a bit more detail.
Posted December 10, 2012
Comments(0)
Lynne Featherstone MP and the Haringey Liberal Democrats have today expressed both concern over the future of Schools funding in Haringey, and anger at Haringey Council, who devised the new funding formula.
The indicative funding figures project that twelve schools in Hornsey and Wood Green will receive less funding for the 2013/14 academic year, in comparison to this year’s allocation. The worst affected school is projected to lose over £97,000. Other schools in the constituency will receive substantially less funding than they expected.
Schools in the borough had expected a high rise in their funding, following the success of Lynne Featherstone MP’s fairer education funding campaign and the Government’s pupil premium policy. As a result of the campaign success and pupil premium policy, Haringey will receive an extra £16 million in funding from the Government for education.
The Haringey Liberal Democrats and Lynne Featherstone MP are now vociferously criticising the Council, for putting together a formula which actually takes funding away from some schools, despite the boost of funds overall.
Haringey Liberal Democrats Education spokesperson, Cllr Katherine Reece said:
Haringey Council had the final say on what went into the new formula. They have placed too much emphasis on deprivation factors. These are very important, but so are other factors like the number of children with special needs.
The figures are not final. New pupil numbers and pupil premium need to be considered. But I am still concerned. The pupil premium should give schools extra, not plug a funding gap caused by a poorly constructed funding formula.
Funding across the borough should be fair. We will keep fighting hard for this.
Lynne Featherstone MP said:
Having campaigned tirelessly to secure fairer funding and extra money for Haringey’s schools – I am absolutely livid that the Council have constructed the funding formula this way.
They have manipulated the formula to swipe the money from schools in my constituency and load it into the east of the borough. It is a cynical act which will harm the schools, teachers and students of Hornsey and Wood Green. This is just typical of the Labour Council – Haringey deserves better than this.
I have written to Clare Kober and demanded to know why this has happened. I have written to all head teachers advising them of the action I am taking. I will be sure to keep them updated on the progress I make.
-
Permalink Reply by Alan Stanton on
-
I'd suggest, Alison, that you write to Cllr Ann Waters the "cabinet" councillor for Children's Services. ann.waters@haringey.gov.uk
My understanding, however, is that the formula - worked out by a body called the Schools Forum - has had to work closely within the new framework with criteria set by the Government. Papers relating to the Schools Forum will be in the public domain.
-
Permalink Reply by Zena Brabazon on
-
Dear All
I thought it would be helpful if I clarified what's going on here. As you know schools' funding is formula based. In Haringey, like every other authority in the land, we have a schools' forum which has reps elected from all the different education sectors - nursery, primary, secondary, special and academies. The reps are elected by the schools are pretty evenly representative of east and west of the borough Governors are also represented. The Council has one place (this is the national rule) which must be filled by a backbencher. I am the Council's rep. Cllr Ann Waters who is the Cabinet member for children also sits at the meetings but does not have a vote. The forum meets quarterly and is chaired currently by the Head of Gladesmore Community School.
Its central purpose is to work with the local authority on issues of schools' finance and to make recommendations to the council on the local formula to be applied. This is the same model nationally. The Government has decided to change the way schools funding is allocated and has been consulting on school funding reform. This has been done at breakneck speed ( which has made it very difficult since this is not an easy area of finance). Its intention is to move towards a national formula. The task which has faced the schools' forum is to try and develop a new formula locally which complies with the DfE guidance, and meets the government's new criteria and to get this done for April 2013.
We want it to be fair and transparent, takes account of social deprivation and other key factors which affect children's achievement and to be as best it can be for Haringey. This has been a huge task - the government gave almost no time and the Council's finance officers working with a small group of Schools' Forum reps have come up with an indicative formula which is fair and transparent.
It is this new formula model from the government which has led to the new budget model and it is simply wrong and unfair to blame the Council, which in this instance has done the very best it can to be fair. This is nothing to do with the campaign for fair funding - it is every thing to do with the government's school funding reform. The Lib Dems are members of this government.
Alongside this, the pupil premium is due to increase from £600 to £900 per pupil in April 2013. This means schools get this amount for every pupil in receipt of free school meals. Needless to say in Haringey we have some schools with a handful of children and schools in Tottenham with some 60% of their pupils. So, budgets also reflect that.
The papers for the schools forum are public and I have attached the link to the relevant Council webpage where the main reports on this are located. Maybe you could tell your friend to have a look at this since its a lot more complicated than suggested in the main posting.
http://www.minutes.haringey.gov.uk/ieListDocuments.aspx?CId=664&...
Zena Brabazon
Cllr, St. Ann's Ward
-
Permalink Reply by Neville Collins on
-
Am I alone, or does anyone think that the borough shouldn't receive any extra money for our schools? Last year, four primaries were to be converted to academies, and several others were put on special measures due to claims of falling standards. On that basis, the extra funding should have been blocked by the government at the earliest possible stage.
-
-
Neville, had the Government done this it would simply have punished children.
-
Permalink Reply by Seema Chandwani on
-
What an odd thing to say...? I thought as a Lib Dem you supported the idea of pupil premium? Why would anyone want to stop schools in the borough getting the money they deserve? Surely you agree that low standards are due (or at least part due) to lower resources? Obviously children & young people won't do worse due to this funding?
Out of curiosity, do you always Council bash or do you like "something" about where you live?
-
-
Hi Neville
What an extraordinary thing to to suggest.
Lib Dems and Labour were united in the campaign for Fair Funding as Haringey schools were getting far less than Hackney or Islington, for example, even though we were treated as Inner London for recruiting and paying teachers. The extra money means we are now level with them as far as funding for our children goes which surely must be a good thing. Money for more books, more resources, some additional staff to support children. What's wrong with that?
It isn't Haringey which has caused the problem with funding schools in the richer part of Haringey - it is the government's new approach to formula funding. It's very disingenuous of your colleagues to blame the Councils. They need to look to the government of which they are partner.
Zena Brabazon
Cllr, St. Ann's Ward
-
-
@ Alan, Zena and Seema,
I have always supported plans to increase funding for local schools, including the use of the pupil premium, but the government should introduce conditions that the money be used to improve standards. After the debacle of the problems affecting both Downhills primary and John Loughborough secondary, the fear is that the money may continue to be poured down the drain... and standards may continue to fall....
-
-
Am I alone in thinking this measure may entice David Lammy back to Falkland Road whence he may send his boy to a school at the heart of his constituency?
-
Permalink Reply by Alison P on
-
Thanks everyone. I posted this because I suspected it wasn't quite as simple as it seemed, and that's clearly correct!
I suppose the thing that still isn't clear to me is what more if anything Haringey could have done given the constraints it is clearly under. The Lib Dem view is clearly that they could have done it differently, but Zena is saying that they didn't have much scope to do anything different. What would the Lib Dems have done instead?
Personally I don't have a problem with schools in more disadvantaged areas getting more money, so I'm not trying to defend my friend's view, I just wanted to understand what was at stake. That said, the timing of this is a bit unfortunate given how much schools across the borough worked to get Haringey's status changed last year, so I can understand parents who thought their schools would benefit being hacked off to learn that they will not. But it is very clear from the minutes Zena links to that the council tried to get these additional funds excluded from the new formula and were not allowed to do that.
"3.7. The final element will be the additional funding from the expected Area Cost Adjustment revaluation We are expecting an overall increase of about £7.3 M across the three blocks. We sought permission to exclude this from the main formula and from the calculation of the MFG to enable better targeting of this resource. This permission was not given and we are therefore required to delegate the new funding via the formula and prior to the calculation of the MFG."
© 2024 Created by Hugh.
Powered by
