Back in the day, I remember vividly that the Greater Glasgow region had Catholic schools and non-denominational schools but it seems there was another divide that passed me unnoticed until today. Apparently there were Labour schools and Tory schools and, now, SNP schools.
Rhona Brankin, Labour shadow Education Minister, has been claiming 328 of the schools being delivered by the Scottish Government between 2007 and 2011 are 'their' schools. Which confuses, even perplexes me. Surely they are 'Government' schools regardless of who happens to be in power at the time?
It's also counter-intuitive to suggest that just because Labour/Lib Dem built hundreds of schools then the SNP need to build even more. A debate that stretches to 'this number is bigger than that number' doesn't usually cover the risks and factors that need ticked off.
For a start, with the easy, expensive credit card that is PFI, it's much easier to throw up new school buildings and put off the queasy interest payments for the decades to come. Any crossover to a more responsible way of paying for schools will inevitably have a period where less schools will be built as there is less money to spend.
If you're going to pay off your exorbitant Mastercard bill, then you don't go on a shopping spree at the same time. And the Chief Executive of the Scottish Futures Trust has already put my mind at ease that SFT will be up and running in the next few years in a recent interview.
Also, if Labour and the Lib Dems did go on a school-building splurge in the dog days of their eight years in power, then presumably many schools that were in need of replacement will have had that need satisfied.
I daresay that Scottish schools that are truly in desperate need of rebuilding will either have been included in the latest programme of rebuilding, will be replaced with one of these 328 'Labour/Lib Dem' schools or local pressure will be put on the MSP to act sooner rather than later.
That, for me, is all as it should be and is as it has ever been.
But there is something horridly parochial in saying that school's yours and that one's mine. We saw what the Catholic/Protestant divisions can do to communities, do we really want to go splitting schools again, this time on political lines?
SNP Tax
3 minutes ago
5 comments:
Jeff - Is the "obsession with building more schools" because the SNP promised to match Labour brick for brick? So, it is another broken promise from Fiona in that case.
The "who built the schools" argument is important because the SNP are claiming schools started by Labour as "built by the SNP". Now, short of lying down in front of the diggers, I'm not sure what influence either way Ms Hyslop could have had on the process.....
By the way, I saw that the SNP promised to have some of the 14 secondary schools finished by May 2011 - care to place a bet on which of them it will be?
The SNP HAS matched Labour's school building programme 2brick for brick".
This is the stupidity of Labour's position. On the one hand they challenge the SNP to matching their school building programme and on the other they condemn the SNP for matching their school building programme - because they are actually "Labour" schools not "SNP" schools.
Utter nonsense. Rhona Brankin is a national embarrassment.
Thomas, thanks for the comment.
With the 'brick for brick' claim, I may be wrong, but is that not in reference to the schools that were already underway at May 2007? The 'Labour' schools that are in the process of being finished off and would only not get finished if Hyslop lay down in front of that digger you mention?
Indy seems to agree (and she knows everything. Seriously, it's actually quite scary)
I am unaware of the 'SNP schools' claims that you suggest but of course they would be just as ridiculous as the 'Labour schools' claims. I should have made it clearer that this post was mostly based on an exchange this morning between Rhona Brankin and Brian Adam.
Brian seemed perfectly happy to make it known right from the off that the 328 schools were started under the previous administration and the 14 recently announced ones are part of the post-2007 block. He didn't phrase it as Labour schools and SNP schools as Rhona was at pains to.
I don't know which schools will be finished by 2011 so I will respectfully resist taking that bet by the way.
Well, I'd place money on Ellon Academy being finished before then if I'm being honest since it attracts the most headlines.
I don't particularly want to get into this debate with Indy or other nationalists about have they met the "brick for brick" pledge. So let me take out the party point scoring (as far I can) and put it like this.
What does "brick for brick" mean? If it is simply a measure of the number of schools completed on any particular administration's watch (without the requirement of those particular Ministers to do anything to assist the project), then the SNP are correct.
If it means the commissioning (actually putting in the money directly or indirectly to the project being a litmus test) of schools during the administration's watch, then Labour are correct.
Put it another way, if these 14 schools are not completed by the time the SNP leave office, do their successors get to caim them as built thanks to them?
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店經紀,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店工作,
專業酒店經紀,
合法酒店經紀,
酒店暑假打工,
酒店寒假打工,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店工作,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店經紀,
專業酒店經紀,
合法酒店經紀,
酒店暑假打工,
酒店寒假打工,
酒店經紀人,
菲梵酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
禮服酒店上班,
酒店小姐兼職,
便服酒店工作,
酒店打工經紀,
制服酒店經紀,
酒店經紀,
菲
梵,酒店,
Post a Comment