New Portobello High School - PPAG Judicial Review

[Bob Jefferson]

Official press release from PFANS today:

Portobello High School problems could affect other schools across the city

More than 900 people have signed a petition calling for a local protest group to drop their appeal against the planned new High School in Portobello in just 48 hours.

Legal action by Portobello Park Action Group (PPAG) continues to delay the project which was due to be started last autumn, potentially causing problems for other city school awaiting refurbishment or replacement.

The PPAG group had taken the Council to court to try and halt plans for the new high school on Portobello Park, but lost their case in early March.

Now they have lodged an eleventh hour appeal, enraging local people who have already waited six years for the project to start.

Not only could the appeal delay the opening of the new school by a further two years - and force the Council to re-tender the contract for the new school, increasing the costs by millions of pounds – but it could reduce the amount available to replace or refurbish other city schools.

The Scottish Government will soon be releasing new funds that Councils can bid for but if Portobello High School doesn't go ahead soon, Edinburgh City Council may not actually be eligible to bid for any.

The anomaly arises because unless work on Portobello HS goes ahead, the Council may have too much money set aside in its capital investment budget (for that school) to qualify for any more.

Speaking on behalf of Portobello for a new School (PFANS) Sean Watters, warned:

“This is now a matter of concern for every parent in Edinburgh. An appeal by PPAG won't just delay Portobello High School, it could delay desperately needed work to improve other schools across Edinburgh, including St John's, St Crispin's and Boroughmuir. And keeping the existing High School safe and functioning is also costing the Council millions.

“It's not just about money though. Local children and their teachers continue to suffer the consequences, in a school that is not fit for purpose. An eight-storey tower block surrounded by a sea of concrete. Lifts that don't work, children crushed in the stairs and no playing fields.

Just a few minutes walk away lies Portobello Park - one of many local parks in an area that is already spoiled for choice as regards open spaces. This new school would only take up a small portion of it. Our children deserve a school that’s fit for the 21st century now – they’ve already waited far too long.”

PPAG claim that they have a duty to appeal the recent judgement against them because they claim it sets a precedent for cash-strapped Councils across Scotland to do as they wish with ‘common good’ land.

However as was pointed out by the Judge in the recent court case (Lady Dorrian) and numerous other commentators, the Portobello High School case involves a Council appropriating common good land to develop a community asset, not disposing of it through a sale to a private developer.

Sean Watters welcomed the Council’s recent announcement that it intends to sue PPAG to recover its legal costs and said:

“The delay caused by the initial legal action was frustrating, especially as it came so late in the day, but this new move is causing huge anger within the community. To lodge an appeaI that has no realistic prospect of success appears to be a cynical ploy to cause maximum delay and expense. Given the huge implications for other projects across the City, it’s only reasonable that the Council try to recover at least some of the costs that PPAG have caused.”

[Maria]

Official press release from PFANS today:

Portobello High School problems could affect other schools across the city


Not only could the appeal delay the opening of the new school by a further two years - and force the Council to re-tender the contract for the new school, increasing the costs by millions of pounds – but it could reduce the amount available to replace or refurbish other city schools.

The Scottish Government will soon be releasing new funds that Councils can bid for but if Portobello High School doesn't go ahead soon, Edinburgh City Council may not actually be eligible to bid for any.

The anomaly arises because unless work on Portobello HS goes ahead, the Council may have too much money set aside in its capital investment budget (for that school) to qualify for any more.

I won't be the only person I'm sure, who finds this extremely worrying.

[Pal of Porty]

I won't be the only person I'm sure, who finds this extremely worrying.

......and sad!

[Mark Cameron]

This is absolutely ridiculous. When are the next community council election due - any member of PPAG who sits on the community council should not be surprised to find they are not re-elected next time round for this utter disgrace against the children of Portobello. There may have been apathy in the past about the members of the CC but that won't be the case next time. I'm f'ing raging at this lot - show some dignity PPAG and give up!

[Betty Windsor]

From the EN website - the story so far in a nutshell .....

BRING BACK THE OLD WEBSITE
Monday, April 2, 2012 at 10:11 AM

STEP 1: Sell the land that the current school is on ------------------------------STEP 2: Steal common good land to build the school in a different location---------------------------------------------------------------STEP 3: Look all innocent and tell a pack of lies to get parents and their wee angels to go and batter the people who are protesting about us taking common good land. -------------------------------------------STEP 4: Use this as a green light to have talks with developers and size up all the other green belt land whilst selling off school properties in valuable locations. -------------------------------------------------------STEP 5: Lose the hospitality records (done this before and got away with it).

[seanie]

The current school site hasn't been sold and a decision has yet been made on what to do with it. As for the Park, Common Good assets are legally owned by the Council to be used to the benefit of the Community. Schools don't conflict with that Common Good purpose. The land will still be Common Good and no sale or disposal occurs.

[seanie]

As already explained, a report went to full Council back in March '10 that recommended the future sale of the site for further investment in the Wave 3 schools. The Councillors didn't accept this aspect of the report and so no final decision has been made on the existing site. The departmental view almost certainly remains that a capital receipt would be the preferred option, but that's not their decision to make. The decision has to be made by Councillors.

[seanie]

As it happens the St John's site is about half the size it should be so an opportunity will arise for it to be refurbished or re-built on an expanded site. However, since the PPAG appeal could have the knock on effect of preventing the Council for bidding for additional funds, any such capital investment could be delayed considerably.

[Betty Windsor]

Re Friday's "mass demonstration".
I hope that permission was sought and a full risk assessment carried out. Is the risk assessment available to the wider public?

I am very excited to announce that I will be conducting tours around Magdalene and the Christians. These will be of an informal nature lasting around half an hour with a question and answer session at the end. I would invite any Porty/Joppa parent who, hitherto has not stepped foot into the area to join me.
I will post details of dates and times in due course.

Watch this space.

[Lashylass]

Another quote from the Evening News:-
116tartantt
Monday, April 2, 2012 at 12:14 AM Councillor Marilyne MacLaren is quoted as saying that she is "extremely angry, & talks of a misguided few having no rationality or logic, & being obsessive" She also talks of putting the education & wellbeing of the children before the Park, & speaks of the protectors of Portobello Park as having lost their moral compass. She also speaks of the Court action as a petty spoiling exercise. This lady has lost the plot, weeks before she loses her seat on the Council. As if her part in the trams overspend & overrun was not enough, she wants to run roughshod over the wishes of the people of Portobello, & destroy their historic greenspace. Historic it is, as it dates back to the absorption of Portobello's Council, in to Edinburgh in 1896, & was designated as perpetual green space for the common good. The only plan that this Council seem to have, is to build on green space, & sell off the common good assets that belong to the people, as witness the proposed "sale" of the Waverley Market site, (Common Good land again) to Sir David Murray of Ibrox fame. Let people be in no doubt, that the Council will build house on the whole of the remaining Park, if they get away with this school nonsense. That was their original plan, (documentary evidence exists) as they planned to build a new golf course at the border with Musselburgh. This in addition to houses on the present school site. The present school site is larger in area, than Musselburgh Grammar, with a similar school role, & they have a grass pitch. Had the Council not been so obstinate, then the rebuilt school on the present site, would now be operational! So, just who is misguided & jeopordising the education & well being of the children? It is you, Councillor MacLaren, who has lost your moral compass in spectacular style. It is not good enough for councillors, who are in a position of such power for such a short period of time, to get away with taking decisions which resound long after they have gone. E.G. Those councillors who were responsible for building the current High School on the old playing fields, heralded as the all singing, all dancing new super duper answer to the educational needs of Portobello. Fast forward 50 years, & it is regarded as unfit for purpose. Value for money? I dont think so. Dont repeat the mistake, & dont go short term. Were the school ever to be located to the Park, then the main proponents should be held responsible for the death of pupils caused by the location on the A1. 1300 children spilling out on to this major artery is an accident waiting to happen, & either councillor MacLaren or councillor Child, or both, should have their personal liberty used as surety. I.E Jail them when the first predictable death occurs. Can I suggest, that, if any one doubts the importance of the centuries old common good in Scotland, then look it up on the internet. It has been sucessfully defended by councillors of all persuations until now. Political pygmies now. Finally, to say that taking Court action is a "petty spoiling exercise" Makes me wonder about Councillor MacLaren's state of mind. Surely she MUST know that the personal sacrafices made by ordinary civic minded people forced to spend time & money to protect the green spaces that belong to all of us. She, on the otjher hand, has nothing to lose, as the council has wasted money, (Ours!) & time, forcing their will, rather than rebuilding on site. It is David v Goliath. The most vociferous supporters for turning our Park in to a concrete jungle, are Estate Agents! That tells it's own story.
Report Unsuitable

[Maria]

Ho hum. More of the same paranoid, council-bashing, delusional rantings. Says it all, doesn't it?

[Pal of Porty]

Report Unsuitable

I think irrelevant would be more appropriate.

[Porty]

Dear Mr. McIntyre,
I have been in touch with the Education Department and I understand it is their intention to seek costs. I print the advice I have had from Billy MacIntyre the Project Manager below. I share your dismay and frustration at the delay to this project.
Yours sincerely,
Gary Peacock
Whilst an accurate position has not, as yet, been fully determined it is estimated that the legal costs incurred by the Council to date in (successfully) defending the petition will be in excess of £75,000.

In light of the urgency to resolve the matter of the petition itself, the Court was not asked to consider the matter of costs during the previous hearing as that might, in itself, have introduced further delay in arriving at a final decision. Consideration of the question of recovery of costs was deferred until the judgement was received and the period for appeal had passed as any decision could have been influenced by events during that period.

As you know, despite the exceptionally strong judgement from Lady Dorrian which not only dismissed the petition on the grounds of delay but supported the Council’s position regarding having the power to appropriate the land on which to build the new school, Portobello Park Action Group Association (PPAG) has now appealed. We have not had any indication of the grounds for appeal on either point.

The necessary approval has therefore now been sought, and received, to seek recovery of expenses from PPAG and this will now be progressed. We will also use all measures available to us to protect the council taxpayer from further expense arising from the ongoing legal proceedings.

[Porty]

Another quote from the Evening News:-
116tartantt
. The most vociferous supporters for turning our Park in to a concrete jungle, are Estate Agents! That tells it's own story.

It means me, I stopped being an Estate Agent on September 13th 1991.
And to think that's the most accurate bit of Tartantt's rant.

[seashell]

despite the exceptionally strong judgement from Lady Dorrian which not only dismissed the petition on the grounds of delay but supported the Council’s position regarding having the power to appropriate the land on which to build the new school, Portobello Park Action Group Association (PPAG) has now appealed. We have not had any indication of the grounds for appeal on either point.

The necessary approval has therefore now been sought, and received, to seek recovery of expenses from PPAG and this will now be progressed. We will also use all measures available to us to protect the council taxpayer from further expense arising from the ongoing legal proceedings.

The emphasis is mine.
A succinct summation of the facts.
It will be interesting to see the grounds for appeal PPAG come up with. Along with how they get the money to pay not only their costs, but the Council's. And, call me cynical if you wish (I'm sure Betty/Gillian and Epycat will be calling me something else, but hey ho...) it does make me wonder that if PPAG had won the appeal, perhaps they might have been planning to seek expenses against the Council, and pay their own legal expenses that way. Which would have been their right, of course.

[Epykat]

I don't have school age children and therefore schools and their catchment areas don't really concern me.

Thanks Sean! A lot of people are amazed that I'm old enough to have children who have left school Must be the sea air!

[seanie]

PPAG must be hoping that judges don't read the press.

Imagine a judge reads PPAG's claims about the recent ruling giving the green light to the sale of Common Good assets with impunity. They might then have a look at Lady Dorrian's judgement, only to find that no, the case has nothing to do with the sale of Commin Good land at all. They'll even read of PPAG's QC arguing that the proposal most certainly wasn't a disposal. What provisional conclusions might a judge form from that?

A) That PPAG are too stupid to understand their own QC's arguments? Or;

B) PPAG will tell any old lies to support their cause?

[seashell]

I'll have a g&t if it's on offer, Porty!

[seanie]

Portobello parents urge protest group to abandon school appeal

Jennifer Peters, a Portobello Park Action Group member, said: "...The precedent set by this legal decision as it stands will have a resounding effect. Councils now have a green light to sell off or develop Scottish park land/common good land without fear of reprisal and irrespective of public opinion."

And so the Portobello Park Action Group's lies are repeated.

[seanie]

Come to think of it, PPAG's legal counsel might not be too chuffed. There's PPAG, spreading absolute nonsense about the recent ruling opening the floodgates to the sale of Common Good land, and an outside observer might conclude that PPAG's legal counsel had told them that was the implication of the ruling. And if that was the case one could only conclude that PPAG's legal advisors were idiots.

[Makaveli]

My kids probably won't go to the new school but as a right minded person I can see that even though the park would not be my number one choice for the school (or any school on any park) - in these circumstances it is the best option. Only 25% of the park is going to be used for the school so that is a good thing no?

And the fact that the rest of the park will be getting an upgrade with new paths for joggers and dog walkers alike then it really is the best solution allround.

[seanie]

Portobello parents urge protest group to abandon school appeal

Jennifer Peters, a Portobello Park Action Group member, said: "...The precedent set by this legal decision as it stands will have a resounding effect. Councils now have a green light to sell off or develop Scottish park land/common good land without fear of reprisal and irrespective of public opinion."

And so the Portobello Park Action Group's lies are repeated.

Although it doesn't seem as if any of the Portobello Park Action Group's supporters are in any way bothered about that. They appear happy to go along with any old bullshit that's fed to them.

[seanie]

Save Port Park is getting the views of the community over on the PPAG Facebook site;

What a load of tosh! You should think shame of yourselves....

You lot are an absolute disgrace to the community of portobello It's 25%, you'll still have your park and the kids will have a safe environment that they deserve, you lot have no heart or community spirit it seems,The fact of the matter is that you have lied to the rest of your flock just so they'll back your laughable campaign! You are a joke the children deserve better

I wish you lot would try to understand the affect this is having on the children's education. You point out the health benefits of open green space, but you'd happily leave my child in a broken old school that isn't fit for purpose. What a bunch of hypocrites you are.

Not interested in local children's welfare scared going to loose out on your big houses!

The people of Portobello DO NOT support your campaign which has been full of lies and half truths!!!

All soon to be deleted of course...

[Makaveli]

Careful seashell cos now Betty will be out looking for anyone wearing a fluffy pink duffel coat walking a dog!!!

[wangi]

admin: posts related to "Big W" have been split to New Portobello High School - Big W site redux. Posts regarding speculation of a user's identity have been removed - please remember our posting guidelines.

[storky]

admin: posts related to "Big W" have been split to New Portobello High School - Big W site redux. Posts regarding speculation of a user's identity have been removed - please remember our posting guidelines.

I appreciate that!

[gillian]

Re Friday's "mass demonstration".
I hope that permission was sought and a full risk assessment carried out. Is the risk assessment available to the wider public?

I am very excited to announce that I will be conducting tours around Magdalene and the Christians. These will be of an informal nature lasting around half an hour with a question and answer session at the end. I would invite any Porty/Joppa parent who, hitherto has not stepped foot into the area to join me.
I will post details of dates and times in due course.

Watch this space.

Tours around Magdelene and the Christians! This does sound quite exciting. When you are making the risk assessment available to the wider public, you might also make a relevance assessment available, that way the wider public would know what you are chatting on about.

[Pal of Porty]

Only 25% of the park is going to be used for the school so that is a good thing no?

Don't believe the 25% - look back to how PPAG worked that one out!

[Pal of Porty]

....I am very excited to announce that I will be conducting tours around Magdalene and the Christians. These will be of an informal nature lasting around half an hour with a question and answer session at the end. I would invite any Porty/Joppa parent who, hitherto has not stepped foot into the area to join me.
I will post details of dates and times in due course.Watch this space.

This has got to rank as one of the most patronising comments ever listed on Talk Porty and that takes some doing given some of your previous statements.

[seanie]

Park group’s appeal ‘will delay city school revamps’

[Betty Windsor]

....I am very excited to announce that I will be conducting tours around Magdalene and the Christians. These will be of an informal nature lasting around half an hour with a question and answer session at the end. I would invite any Porty/Joppa parent who, hitherto has not stepped foot into the area to join me.
I will post details of dates and times in due course.Watch this space.

This has got to rank as one of the most patronising comments ever listed on Talk Porty and that takes some doing given some of your previous statements.

I don't know who you think I'm supposed to be patronising. Given that at least one of the supporters of the school on the park had to ask where the park was. It is clear to me that most of the people who want to build on the park don't live in the area and chances are have never been into the schemes. I know that's not the case for you and the offer was open to anyone who was interested in the living conditions of the people from whom you want to take the park.
I will put out times and dates and see if anyone is brave enough.

[Betty Windsor]

My kids probably won't go to the new school but as a right minded person I can see that even though the park would not be my number one choice for the school (or any school on any park) - in these circumstances it is the best option. Only 25% of the park is going to be used for the school so that is a good thing no?

And the fact that the rest of the park will be getting an upgrade with new paths for joggers and dog walkers alike then it really is the best solution allround.

I thnk you'll find that the council are seeking to use 92% of the park.

[Betty Windsor]

Seanie - Have you received any remuneration directly or indirectly from the council for consultancy work connected with the new high school?

[seanie]

No. I'm not even a consultant. Who feeds you this tripe?

[Mark Cameron]

Heading towards 1000 signatures on the petition for PPAG to drop their appeal with names of those in our community in favour being shown openly. Where is PPAGs list of members against the school - are they willing to stick their names down and show the rest of the community who (and how many) are blocking this development?