In their consultation document they state:
Unfortunately this site, amidst various waste processing facilities, with heavy skip lorry traffic, has long been notorious as one of London's worst pollution blackspots. LINK Monitoring has become less effective through the use of pollution suppressors by Boris Johnson as Barry Gardiner tweeted back in April 2012:We are currently discussing possible sites for Gladstone School with Brent Local Authority and the Education Funding Agency. Site options are necessarily subject to commercial sensitivity, although site options currently being considered anticipate siting the school within a 500 metre radius of Neasden Underground station on Brownfield sites with existing buildings, and do not include any greenfield or open land.
"Boris's pollution suppressors near air quality monitors is like putting breathing apparatus on the canary in the mines!"
 |
| Neasden Lane: Photo: Veleospeed.co.uk |
In September 2013 Boris Johnson gave the following written response LINK to a question from Stephen Knight abhout Neasden Lane:
The Neasden Lane monitoring station is classified as an industrial site and the main local sources are regulated by either the Environment Agency or the London Borough of Brent.Although meant to be reassuring this hardly paints a picture of a healthy environment for school children.
Significant progress has been made this year with all the Environment Agency regulated waste sites now being fully enclosed. The metal recycling site is now partially enclosed to screen the site more effectively. This has reduced the fugitive particle pollution from the sites.
Dust suppressants, which were shown by King’s College London evaluation report to be highly effective at sites like Neasden Lane, continue to be applied. The Environment Agency has also worked with operators to implement a particulate alarm system which informs operators if particulates on site exceed agreed levels. They then must take action such as ceasing operations and ensure site activities are not contributing to exceedences.
The Environment Agency have increased inspection frequency to fortnightly compared with approximately quarterly. Many of these visits are conducted jointly with the London Borough of Brent to improve coordination of enforcement activity. This approach has identified new opportunities to reduce emissions from the concrete batching plant regulated by the London Borough of Brent.
37 comments:
I hope all that pollution doesn't make the gold braiding on the children's blazer lapels look grubby. They're a devil to keep clean as it is.
Good luck with that.
I am sure large numbers of parents will sign up to a school where the health of their child is at risk !
Twin it with Michaela. They could share hard hats and gasmasks stories.
Given that the governors and most of the parents are from Barnet, it's an even odder place to site it.
What a mess.
If you don't want your child to go to a school in an area of high pollution, don't send your child to school in London.
You hear that, country schools? Get ready to repel 1.3 million cockney boarders!
Is that the new estimates for the amount of families our Labour Council keeps sending out of area?
More social cleansing, this time for the middle-class aspirants?
'First they came for the council tenants ....etc'
Mike Hine
The fact that this site is not even being mentioned in literature for prospective parents says alot about how the founders know parents will react to this site.
There is still time to stop this going ahead-fill in the consulation and complain to your Brent MPs.
Lisa
Oh how far the mighty have fallen. The group who wants to "bring the confidence and aspirations better off children acquire at birth" to the mean streets of state school children in London are now hoping to fill their little lungs with toxins.
This group is ill suited to run a school and site is one of my lesser of my concerns.
Paul Phillips, Gladstone Free School's principal designate, still works with the failing AET chain in curriculum leadership. In March 2014 AET were barred by the DfE from taking on more academies but, clearly, those in curriculum leadership are welcome to moonlight with a new free school on the side. Mr. Phillips was appointed by Gladstone School on 1/1/14 so he's now been employed in a role advertised at £95K plus for over a year and has yet to help educate a single child.
Curriculum is something of an interesting topic with Gladstone School, in it's early campaign and even through approval from the DfE, they were peddling their own home-brewed curriculum. Jim Gatten, one of the founders, along with this wife, Maria Evans Chair of Governors at Gladstone, had failed to sell a curriculum Jim wrote cleverly named Do It....Write! Gladstone School was to use this curriculum and, who knows, maybe sell it on the AET or hope for a foothold in the free school curriculum market. When it became exposed locally, Gladstone School immediately responded by saying that they had previously decided it was a conflict of interest and will not use the Do It....Write curriculum. They are now developing a "London-based curriculum" and with all the transparency of a dirty goldfish bowl, it is not clear if Jim and Maria will personally profit from it.
In the year ending 2013, Gladstone had spent a massive £77K and labelled £74K of it as "charitable expenses" in their annual accounts. This is before the hiring of the head and all site finding expenses would have been covered by the EFA.
All of this brings no good reason why Gladstone School should open in Brent or anywhere. Parents and community beware.
On the contrary, I think that those involved in the Gladstone project clearly have a lot they can offer the young learners of 21st century London from their own expertise and experience.
Namely that, in modern Britain, there's a lot of money to be made from bullshit and failure.
Mike Hine
As a parent, choosing Gladstone School for our children has resulted in advancing their opportunities to develop highest grade asthma at the fastest pace available than at any other school in London. Top marks to Gladstone Governors, the EFA and DfE.
Absolutely! Perserverence with bullshit and failure will get them far.
Funniet thing I've read in ages. Lot of madmen trying to build on the Rugby pitch now back to putting dots on maps again. I'm sure they haven't researched their latest goldmine.
The school will admit 120 pupils per year according to their marketing material, that's 840 pupils when full. The consultation document says it will have 1200 pupils. They either have poor maths or are lying, unimpressive either way.
Surely a better option would be a new secondary school as part of Brent Cross redevelopment ?
That would be a much better location.
Under the Brent Cross redevelopment scheme, Whitefield School will be expanded. There really is no need for these school places in Neasden. The only identified need for places, by Gladstone's own research, is in the south of Brent and Neasden is not in that area.
The problem with free schools is they aren't planned by anyone other than themselves, they don't take into consideration the best place for the school and they don't work with the community or local authority. They simply pop up once they have approval from the central government and off they go to find a site. It's a ridiculous programme.
I had wondered why Gladstone was opting for shiny turquoise clip-on ties. It all makes sense now, pop it in your school bag and don't let the air soil it on the way to school.
I agree. A new secondary school as part of Brent Cross redevelopment would be a much better location.
They just seem to be throwing schools up without any thought on transport links etc etc.
I guess that is the free market finding some land and hope for the best and start a school, rather than reviewing all the options and strategically locate a school.
Free schools really are free to what they want, seems this one doesn't feel it should have to protect children from air pollution. The free school proposers should hang their heads in shame - children's health and wellbeing should be at the forefront of the minds of any person who is in a position to make decisions about our children.
Shame on the DfE for approving this hazard.
What are Brent council going to do about this?
I see Brent and Kilburn Times have written a piece cheerleading Gladstone's announcement? Shall we all comment there and enlighten the unsuspecting masses?
Whitefield School is a Barnet secondary turned academy but still a secondary. It has 34 empty places in current year 7 so no places are currently needed in that part of Barnet.
http://www.whitefield.barnet.sch.uk
I couldn't agree more about Jim, scary determination.
We all should, I doubt that anyone, unless you drive or walk around this area is aware of the serious and very dangerous pollution in this area
Problem solved.
Fill up a school that is empty and no need to spend Osbornes money that he keeps telling everyone he has no money to spend in any event.
O wait ! is this a vanity project for a few parents who live next to Crest Academy and don't want to send their offspring to a failing school ?
Seems you have hit it on the head with a few pushy parents not wanting their child to be placed at Crest Academy and why school has to be located in this area so they have an alternative school.
How about their Free School simply taking over Crest Academy ?
Why have these Barnet parents (there really are only 2 parents in this campaign and they are married) chosen Brent? Where they live, they could easily walk to Whitefield (a good secondary academy according to Ofsted and they clearly have no issues with academies) or Hampstead School, also a good school according to Ofsted?
I think they may be after money. The are curriculum developers and they have yet to make a sale.
You clearly don't have a child looking for a secondary school if you can suggest Crest Academy. Go and visit the school and educate yourself. Idiot.
Sounds like a parent from Gladstone Free School suggesting they could not possibile send their child to Crest Academy.
Well Brent if that is the closest school to these parents then send them to it.
Free Schools should not be about pushy parents getting a school next to them so that do not have to accept a failing school.
To bad push parents accept what most of us have been accepting without complaint.
It would be good to see Brent Greens requesting a full review and possibile termination of approved Free Schools in the Borough if they are elected.
What I think is desperately in the Borough is a full review of where New schools should be build and not this Free market approach where any bit of land Will do.
The Free Market I am afraid does not take into account "Self Interest"
That is the promoter is not concerned about other children only their child.
Fair point about Crest Academy but adding further academies and free schools hardly seems the answer, especially when the free school is being proposed by a group chancers.
Always nice to hear a reasoned argument reasonably presented ........
In agreement for a review.
It is a tragedy for Our future Young people.
The community as a Whole should be involved in the decision of New schools and not a few parents who clearly are only interested in their child.
Enough said !!!!
It is NOT a fair point about Crest Academy at all. I've had the privilege of meeting many of their students, espeically the brilliant Sixth Form. I've visited the school many times over the past decade, and seen how it's changed and improved. The new buildings are superb - the final component needed to make sure it will, as I am sure, get at least a Good and eventually an Outstanding. The teachers are impressive as heck.
I get very angry when Crest gets slated still like this. Some of it is based I think on the legeacy of it being John Kelly Secondary Modern, and a kind of gestalt memory that it is Not a Good Place. I've also a nasty feeling that a very few look at the demographic, especially the hijabi girls, and make some very unpleasant assumptions. Gladstone School themselves haven't helped with that worldview.
They should build the school on a park. Far less polluted.
Will no one speak for Jim Gatten and his vision?
That seems to be done by The Brent & Kilburn Times. They ommitted crucial information about the potential of toxic harm to children when reporting on the announcement of the site for the school.
Sadly, for us to hear any truths about this undemocratic, shambolic and utterly disastrous proposal for a school we need to seek out the information within our trusted community and on opener forums such as Wembley Matters.
What is also very concerning is the removal online comments on the the Brent & Kilburn Times press announcement of the school site. Who is responsible for this censorship? Why is Gladstone School refusing to communicate to the parents they have been courting, what else are they trying to hideaway?
This Will end up like The never ending refurbishment of Michaela School without proper grounds unless you want your child exposed to toxins.
Our poor future Children
Post a Comment