Friday, December 12, 2008

THE PEOPLE V THE SNP - SOUTH PRIMARY FIGHTS ON - SNP COUNCIL HUMILIATED AT MEETING.

Thursday Dec. 11Th. 08 - Meeting of Renfrewshire Council. The orchestrated applause for SNP speakers was not enough, the prearranged false laughter when labour speakers made a point was somehow more false than ever, the rehearsed abuse by the SNP, the now traditional nationalist heckling of opposition speakers, yet again did not work, once again it served to show up the SNP administration on Renfrewshire Council for what they are, not a political party but a mob. What Marx described as the “Lumpen Proletariat” their behaviour this time created a different atmosphere, where in the past they had usually created one of nastiness and thuggery; met with withering contempt from us in the labour seats, this time we had an audience, the public gaze made them “bottle it” their excesses were being witnessed and they couldn’t handle it, they didn’t know how to behave properly because they haven’t done so for so long.

Another victory for the South School Parents, yes folks they were the audience, this time the SNP had to perform their pathetic circus under the disbelieving gaze of the angry parents, you just can’t put these parents off, they are indefatigable, a great bunch of people galvanised by having right on their side; much to the anger and embarrassment of the SNP. This time there was no hiding place for the SNP/Lib Dem Cllrs. who want to shut their school. Large demonstrations, Candlelit vigils, emails, letters, public meetings, street stalls and many more activities have turned SNP/Lib. Dem. Councillors into a collection of cowardly escape artists and vanishing shadows; they have hidden from these parents and have shown contempt for them by refusing to engage with them. The visitors to the council chamber; freshly betrayed by Alex(the spiv)Salmond were able to see for themselves what these political non persons look like as they cowered from their gaze, comment after comment and point after point was made by Labour Councillors attacking the administration's intention to close South Primary and they never answered any of them.

The fear and loathing of the administration for the parents was evident when one of their councillors instructed a council officer to threaten to expel them from the chamber because they had cheered and applauded some anti closure statements, maybe someone can inform me which councillor this was, I’m sure some people will know. Despite the topical nature of the South School situation and the continuous references to it as well as the Labour motion on the school plus the presence of the parents; incredibly the SNP administration’s convener of education Cllr. Cameron did not say a word about the whole affair. She sat silently throughout the whole meeting, is she on board with the SNP policy? Is she about to rebel? I can only say that it was not difficult to spot the difference between Cllr. Cameron and a ray of sunshine here as Cllr. Mackay humiliatingly removed her from her brief.

I have speculated in the past about whether this consultation was meaningful, well at this meeting we heard the hapless and completely befuddled Cllr. McCartin refer to “when the school closes” followed by the hugely inexperienced and incompetent council leader Cllr. Mackay who; while arguing against moving the final decision to a full council; talked about such a delay causing confusion and interfering with the move and the placing of the children for the new term, i.e. after closure, “Freudian slips” letting them down I fear. Labour’s motion to move the decision on South School from the Education Committee to the full Council was defeated by the SNP/Lib. Dem. Administration, a decision borne of fear. The full council would have allowed every councillor to have their say, especially the councillors for the ward which the school is in; only one of the councillors on the education board represents the ward the school is in; Cllr. McGurk Lib. Dem. She will not be able to hide unless she throws a “sickie” the rest of the SNP/Lib. Dem. Cllrs. will be delighted to keep their heads below the parapet; their relief at the vote was palpable.

This council meeting also gave me the chance to skewer the SNP and Cllr. Brian Lawson over the hypocrisy of the SNP relating to housing transfer. Cllr. Lawson has been protesting more and more desperately about a campaign by his former colleagues in the Scottish Socialist Party; they have accused him and the SNP of giving away council houses to private companies. This is being fought out in the letters page of the PDE “I repeat again; we are not giving away houses to private companies” (Cllr. B Lawson SNP). I asked the meeting where we had heard this before and reminded him and the SNP that we had heard it before when Cllr. Lawson and the Scottish Socialist Party accused the Labour Administration of exactly that when the issue of housing transfer was voted on about two years ago. Now the SNP are quite happy to let the remaining council houses in Ferguslie Park be transferred to the Ferguslie Park Housing Association depending on a yes result in a ballot of tenants, exactly what labour were doing while he and his disingenuous Party were accusing us of giving them away.
This is a 100 % case of double standards from the SNP, there is no other way to describe it, I invited Cllr. Lawson SNP to comment and let the meeting know if he and the SNP had been disingenuous then or if they were being disingenuous now, he did comment on Labour’s motion describing the last 18 months of the SNP/Lib. Dem. Administration as a disaster for the people of Renfrewshire but he remained strangely silent about the housing transfer question, perhaps he forgot, what do you think?
Just for the record the SNP are not giving away council houses to the private sector and neither were we in the Labour Party, the difference between us of course was the usual one.

We (Labour) told the truth, they; the (SNP) lied.

62 comments:

Shug Niggurath said...

What Marx called the lumpenproletariat was not 'the mob', but rather criminals and people who refuse to work.

Would you say you agree with that?

Anonymous said...

Why are you so against houses going to private companies and yet you were happy to put all of our new schools into the hands of private companies. Hypocrisy at its best

Cllr Terry Kelly said...

(Shug Niggurath) 09:39
This is not my interpretation of what Marx meant, it is a highly subjective view taken by you, I just liked his description of them and thought it could have been the SNP.
You should consider why these people were in the position they were in and then reconsider what Marx was talking about.

Cllr Terry Kelly said...

agentmancuso Dec. 12 Th. 08 7:16 pm

And your point is caller ?

Cllr Terry Kelly said...

(Anonymous) 11:06
Entering into a deal to build schools by whatever means is not the same as handing already built assets to a private company for nothing.

If private companies were to enter into an agreement with the council to build and rent housing then that deal could be considered or we could of course leave people homeless and children without schools.

That would mean that some people could claim to be ideologically pure while others suffered, some of these ideologically pure people no doubt living in nice private houses and well off, it’s a strange world isn’t it ?

Cllr Terry Kelly said...

(Anonymous) 11:31
“Looks like Oh no you cant !” You really don’t understand the proper concept of winning and losing, so you and the SNP consider it a victory to close this school, a victory over the children and their parents, well done ! it shows the SNP in their true light.

This school is not the worst in terms of numbers attending, can you explain why therefore it is to close ?

Anonymous said...

Terry.
What a sad bunch of losers the SNP are, Cllr Cameron struck down with a bad case of can't speak, won't speak, (p.s are we getting paid double at Christmas). The wee man Cllr Brian Lawson, a puffed up little non entity (who has small person syndrome). The arrogant Cllr McKay, who is so full of his own importance, he has now installed four mirrors in his office to ensure that he can see himself at any point in any given day.

Cllr Jim Mitcheal, aka, “I would support the School but Labour were bad to us the last time” what a little wind bag.

I just don't know how the opposition parties can sit still with this monstrous bunch of fakes, and I quote from an earlier speaker "snake oil pedlers". I heard that after the full council meeting, Cllr McKay’s favourites returned to his office and sat and praised Derek's sharp wit, robust answers, Cllr McLaren sat stroking Derek and moisturising his feet, I am sorry I can't write any more, roll in the next elections, roll on the Labour Party, roll on Cllr Kelly and all his hard work.

Anonymous said...

You say :-

"This school is not the worst in terms of numbers attending,"

Please tell us which Renfrewshire school(s) has a lower occupancy rate than the 36% at South School.

Anonymous said...

This school is the worst attended in Renfrewshire in terms of the roll against the capacity. Prove me wrong!

Cllr Terry Kelly said...

(Anonymous) 13:41
I have now dealt with this accusation on three occasions, all anonymous; perhaps it’s you each time, we will never know unless you crawl out of hiding.

South Primary is not the worst school in terms of roll against capacity, nor is it the worst in terms of costs to run the school which is the SNP’s reason for closing it.

Now there are two bold and uncomplicated statements from me, and they are also the position of the parents, this is a golden opportunity for you to prove me wrong, get on with it.

Cllr Terry Kelly said...

Anonymous - Sunday, December 14, 2008 12:15:00 PM

I invite you to take up the challenge which I offered to another anonymous coward, see below for details.

Sunday, December 14, 2008 3:42:00 PM

Cllr Terry Kelly said...

(Anonymous) 10:30
This is not what I would describe as a balanced contribution to the debate, it’s a bit personal and you might say these things but, I couldn’t possibly comment.

It does however have the unmistakeable ring of being “straight from the heart” therefore since opinions and disagreements are running high and it’s no worse than you get in political sketches in reputable newspapers, I will print it.

Derek said...

Their is no school in Renfrewshire that has a worse roll against capacity than South Primary. Terry kelly is telling lies otherwise he would prove it by telling us where.

Anonymous said...

I like your typical socialist analysis of people that live in private houses.

"some of these ideologically pure people no doubt living in nice private houses and well off"

Many people that live in private houses are not well off Terry. It is just that they have chosen to spend their hard earned money to provide a benefit for their children in the future.

Take a walk around your own ward Terry and you will find houses filled with plasma TV's, X-boxes, Nintendos, designer clothes etc.

I live in a private bought house in a decent area that my wife and I have struggled to pay for and we and our children do not have the fancy accessories mentioned above that are found in many rented houses that many are paid for by state benefits.

We don't have spare money for cigarettes, booze and drugs but we do have a sense of self respect.

People like you make me sick as you believe that the world owes you a living and that anyone else who has strived to better their selves through honest graft should give it back to the wasters of life.

I have to really ask - Who are the well off?

Anonymous said...

You say "South Primary is not the worst school in terms of roll against capacity",


PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE TELL US WHICH ARE WORSE !

Cllr Terry Kelly said...

(Derek) 17:29
I take that to be a failure of nerve then ?

I have stated my position clearly, if you think I’m wrong then the onus is on you to prove me wrong, it’s not enough to say I’m wrong.

Why are you not prepared to back up your assertion that I’m telling lies ? what kind of wimp are you ? we are waiting for you to put the money where the mouth is.

Cllr Terry Kelly said...

(Anonymous) 18:42
I have made my statement about this several times, if you think I’m wrong then prove me wrong, I’m telling you that you can’t do that, you can’t prove me wrong because I’m not.

I can hardly stick my neck out any further can I ? what are you afraid of ?

Cllr Terry Kelly said...

(Anonymous) 17:41

“plasma TV's, X-boxes, Nintendos, designer clothes etc. provided by the state”

Most of these 'underclass scroungers' as you would call them also have big cars, second houses and foreign holidays provided by state benefits as well, the only ones who can "outscrounge" them in fact are the Royal Family. you half witted bigot.

“we do have a sense of self respect”

I doubt if heartless right wing reactionary knuckle draggers like you have any respect from anyone else.

Go back to watching your re-runs of Alf Garnett and reminiscing about the good old times under Thatcherism, you are a sick “Sun Editorial” laughing stock.

Derek said...

I obtained the figures from the council re roll against capacity for all schools. Anyone can obtain these and see that you are a liar.

There is no school in Renfrewshire with a lower roll aginst capacity than South Primary and in fact general figures that are available from the website categorically state that there are only three primary schools with less than 50% occupancy and South primary is the lowest at 36%.

These are the facts available to everyone.

If you wish to say that I am wrong then the onus is on you to prove it. I have refuted your statement and provided where I have obtained my information.

You will not state where you have obtained yours because you have made it up to mislead the public.

It is clear that you are the coward and have lost your nerve because you know that you are lying and have been found out.

Monty Python said...

It seems your unwillingness to state your information source has exposed your cowardice

Brave Sir Terry ran away.
("No!")
Bravely ran away away.
("I didn't!")
When danger reared it's ugly head,
He bravely turned his tail and fled.
("I never!")
Yes, brave Sir Terry turned about
And gallantly he chickened out.
("You're lying!")
Swiftly taking to his feet,
He beat a very brave retreat.
Bravest of the braaaave, Sir Terry!

Anonymous said...

Cllr Kelly,

I think that you are right that people’s feelings are running high.

As an SNP voter and supporter they promised so much and have now failed on several fronts, I have repeatedly tried to phone Cllr McKay and keep getting the brush off.

My sister stays in Glenburn, she has tried to get a meeting with her councillor to discuss the south school, she is still waiting for her phone calls to be retuned, these and many many other examples will prove to you that yes! feelings are running very high. Cllr McKay said that it would be like the second coming, the SNP would sweep away all traces of the Labour party in Renfrewshire, he would promote innovative new policies and initiatives that would regenerate this town, one spark would lead to a new birth of this town, the old ways of Labour would be finished and put to rest.

Mr Kelly, if you think that I am wrong and Cllr McKay has provided and honoured all these commitments and all his promised initiatives, then I am happy for you to say so!

I think though that when you have an opportunity to digest this blog, you will see that I am right and this will explain why feelings are running so high!

“He promised much to the many and gave only to the few”

Stuart Glowie
Paisley.

Anonymous said...

your silence say it all

Jock said...

terry,
why was the high school in the north end closed some years back? Was it during a Labour council admin?
Why do you describe yourself as a "socialist" when you are a member of the capitalist-supporting Labour Party? I dont think you really understand the meaning of the word socialism. Socialism is gettting rid of the wage-labour/profit system of capitalism. The Labour/SNP sniping is a phoney war, you both basically support the continuation of capitalism! Karl Marx could have given a few economic lessons to Gordon Browns incredible claim of ending boom and bust.

Anonymous said...

Here is the link that shows the official figures of roll against capacity that proves that there are only 3 primary schools in Renfrewshire that have a less than 50% roll against capacity.

South Primary has 36% and a check with Renfrewshire Council will confirm that this is the lowest.

Where did you get your info from Terry. The Hans Christian Andersen book of school statistics?

http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2008/09/29091400/14

Jim Lewis said...

The boxing match over which Renfrewshire school has the lowest occupancy rate is a bit of a red herring. I'd suggest that what's more important is which school in Paisley is worst, since closing a school in, say, Houston and shipping pupils to Johnstone would be more problematic. More importantly, what schools in South's area are worst? Since it's fairly obvious that the cost of keeping a school two thirds empty is insupportible, at least to me, and I'm paying for it, so I have the right to an input, what's to be done? With Todholm occupied at 61% of capacity, Lochfield at 75% and West at 77.5%, doesn't it make sense to bite the bullet? Of course it's upsetting for parents of pupils there, but isn't it always? Was that an issue for Renfrewshire Council under your party's regime when St Mirin's and Merksworth were closed and the land sold for private development? Isn't it true, Terry, that you could so easily have found yourself on the other side of this debate had your comrades managed a win at the last election? Isn't the sheer hypocrisy of a councillor who helped close these and other schools down breathtakingly galling? All I can say is that the parents fighting to keep South School open must be truly desperate to allow themslves to be used for political gain by such an opportunist as you.

a very public sociologist said...

It's always tickled me that Marx included the 'literati' among the lumpen's numbers!

Anonymous said...

I see that you have been silenced.

Stuck your neck out too far?

Cllr Terry Kelly said...

(Anonymous) 15/12/08

“your silence say it all”
You wish.

Cllr Terry Kelly said...

(Derek) 14/12/08
“Anyone can obtain these and see that you are a liar”

If this statement were true I would not only be a liar I would be a complete idiot since it’s me who has been directing you and the other SNP councillors and supporters, all of you too scared to identify yourselves, to the information, your claim has the ring of desperation about it.

“there are only three primary schools with less than 50% occupancy and South primary is the lowest at 36%”

This is a fact but, you seem to have dropped the reference to capacity, I wonder why that is.

“It is clear that you are the coward and have lost your nerve because you know that you are lying and have been found out”

So, your case is that I directed you to the information which proves me a liar right? you’re lucky you’re not in court.

The clear reason given for the closure of South Primary is that it is too expensive, the 'bulldung' about capacity came later as the parents demolished the SNP arguments.

I have directed you and the rest of the SNP anonymous mob to the information, I have stated to you repeatedly that there are 5 schools in Renfrewshire where the costs to educate a pupil are higher, you seem to have missed this point, perhaps you should go back and check the following.

a) What is the reason for closing South Primary ?

b) Where is South Primary in the table of costs which show how much it costs to educate a child in each school ?

c) Why are schools which are more expensive to teach a child being kept while South Primary is being closed.

As I said you are lucky you are not in a court of law.

Cllr Terry Kelly said...

(Monty Python) 14/12/08
“It seems your unwillingness to state your information source has exposed your cowardice”
A bizarre conclusion even for an idiotic SNP coward.
I have spent a great deal of time advising the SNP hermits where to get the information.

Cllr Terry Kelly said...

(Anonymous) 15/12/08

Stuart – The SNP in Renfrewshire have been a disgrace but, nowhere has that been more evident than in their disgraceful record on education.

Schools have lost 119 teachers, not one probationary teacher has been employed, schools have suffered savage cut backs to the extent that teachers are buying materials out of their own pockets, children’s futures have been jeopardised and a climate of fear exists which makes it dangerous for a teacher’s prospects if they speak out.

South Primary is an example of inexperience and incompetence as well as callousness on behalf of the SNP led council, if this parent’s campaign had been a fight the referee would have stopped it, the council have been humiliated as the parents demolished their case at every meeting.

The SNP reaction to this is to hide, make no mistake it’s no accident that the SNP councillors have gone missing, they are afraid to face the parents and children of the school which they are about to close, they are educational vandals and it’s the children who will suffer.

The SNP call themselves “Scotland’s Party” how dare they ?

Cllr Terry Kelly said...

(Jock) 16/12/08
Jock – do try to keep up I have already stated that Labour have closed schools in the past and no doubt will in the future, any party which says this does not apply to them is lying. Nothing stands still for ever, “The only constant is change” (Leon Trotsky)

As far as your other remarks are concerned I have heard all this sanctimonious waffle before. I consider myself a Socialist and I suspect that the difference between us is that I have been involved in the struggle all my life, unlike some who stand on the sidelines wringing their hands, good at slogans and banners most of you.

Cllr Terry Kelly said...

(Anonymous) 16/12/08
Go and read my reply to your other SNP colleague in hiding, you SNP people are pathetic, these parents and children from South Primary are dangerous aren’t they, I would stay in hiding if I were you.

Derek said...

T Kelly 14/12/2008

"South Primary is not the worst school in terms of roll against capacity".

Derek 14/12/2008

"There are only three primary schools with less than 50% occupancy and South primary is the lowest at 36%."

T Kelly 17/12/2008 re above comment

"This is a fact but, you seem to have dropped the reference to capacity, I wonder why that is."



So let me rephrase my last comment


"There are only three primary schools in Renfrewshire with less than 50% roll against capacity and South primary is the lowest at 36%."

All clear now and perhaps you can explain the lie you have posted as shown at the top of this comment.

It seems that you are trying to mislead the public.

Cllr Terry Kelly said...

(Jim Lewis) 16/12/08

Much of what I’ve come to expect Jim you do bare a grudge don’t you, maybe I should have been more lenient with you over the past while.

Comment if you must but don’t allow your anger at past thrashings to colour your thoughts, this is children’s futures we are talking about here after all.

Perhaps I can start now, I suggest that you familiarise yourself with the background to all this, can I further suggest that you check up on what I have said before, starting with my repeated statements that Labour have closed schools in the past and no doubt will do so in the future, only a fool would claim otherwise as I’ve said before Jim, above all strive to avoid making a clown of yourself, it’s long since ceased to be amusing.

Cllr Terry Kelly said...

(Derek) 14:55
I have not mislead the public and neither have the parents as you clearly imply, you really ought to identify yourself if you are going to make such accusations, cowardice again?

I have stated clearly several times and do so again to give you another chance, see if you can find some courage and answer my questions.

a) What was the criteria for closure?

b) Are there 5 schools in Renfrewshire where it is more expensive to educate children than South Primary? Now that you know how to do research you should be able to find this out.

c) If the answer to b) above is yes which of course it is, why is South Primary being closed?

d) Would you consider a refusal to answer these legitimate questions as “misleading the public”

Cllr Terry Kelly said...

(Anonymous) 09:32
I can only conclude that you are another SNP cave dweller who has spent too much time in bad company, you and your SNP mob clearly roll over easily but don’t assume that decent people do the same.

Jim Lewis said...

"South Primary is not the worst school in terms of roll against capacity".


If it's the one with the lowest occupancy, then it is. The occupancy would be found by dividing roll by capacity and multiplying by 100. This would give us occupancy expressed as a percentage. Ergo, if South is the school with the lowest occupancy rate, the it IS the worst in terms of roll against capacity.

Assuming that you're correct about South not being the most expensive school per pupil, which one do you think should close instead?

No, by the way, I don't bare(sic) a grudge. I've come to be quite fond of you if you must know. So much so that I risked ostracism at my club by inviting you to come as my guest to see a couple of your constituents play and perhaps hve a chat with them afterwards. How big an olive branch is required? I haven't had your RSVP yet.

Anonymous said...

It is clear that you have lied over this matter by stating that there are other schools with a lower roll against capacity when there is not.

That is deception and attempting to mislead the public for political gain. You have no interest in parent or pupils.

I hope that someone brings this to the attention of the standards commission

You should be ashamed of yourself.

Cllr Terry Kelly said...

“roll against capacity”

This is a red herring introduced because the parent’s campaign was kicking their butts at every meeting.

Consider this, we want to close a school on grounds of costs which was what they said so, we will close South Primary and give the reason that it has the lowest roll against capacity even though school capacity is a movable feast, and this phrase was unknown until well into the campaign, they created it to try to save themselves, think about it, it makes no sense whatsoever.

There are 5 schools which are more expensive but South will close, is there no one listening ?

“which one do you think should close instead?”

None of them, this creates the chance to reduce class sizes as the SNP promised (lied) they have fallen at the first hurdle in Renfrewshire.

At the risk of sounding flippant I would rather watch the fire going out than watch rugby, it might be enjoyable to play and be a good laugh for some, but watching it ? come on.

Anonymous said...

Terry,

Isn't it true that the labour decision to extend Todholm and reduce the South Primary catchment area the real reason why it has been left so underoccupied.

Why was Todholm capacity extended so much when there is clearly ample school places on the doorstep.

I wonder if the parents are aware that Labour are the architects of this situation.

Cllr Terry Kelly said...

Anon 16.53
Is it possible that those who are shutting South Primary (the SNP) despite there being 5 schools in Renfrewshire which are more expensive to run are guilty of deception and misleading the public.

Why don’t you or some of the other SNP cowards identify yourselves and report me to whoever you like.

You are so confident of your argument that you are afraid to even put your name to it, that’s how ashamed the SNP are.

Cllr Terry Kelly said...

Anon 17.58
The SNP mob getting more and more desperate.I think people who are following this will note that the SNP cowards don't have the bottle to put there names to their comments, what kind of argument is that they are making ?

You missed out a bit of the history, education officers asked the last Labour administration to consider closing South Primary and we said no !

Anonymous said...

ANOTHER BAREFACED LIE FROM TERRY KELLY.

"“roll against capacity”

This is a red herring introduced because the parent’s campaign was kicking their butts at every meeting.

Consider this, we want to close a school on grounds of costs which was what they said so, we will close South Primary and give the reason that it has the lowest roll against capacity even though school capacity is a movable feast, and this phrase was unknown until well into the campaign,"

To say this was unkown until well into the campaign is another huge lie and deception when it was outlined in the original proposal

As established, occupancy means exactly the same thing as roll against capacity.

The original consultation document released at the start states as follows and I quote.

5.1 There are a number of factors leading to this proposal. These include:

1. The oversupply of primary places in the ares served by these schools.

2.THE OCCUPANCY RATE OF SOUTH PRIMARY SCHOOL;

3.The high cost of education in South Primary School when compared with the average cost of education in Renfrewshire primary schools.

4.Addressing anomolies in school catchment area boundaries.

Couldn't be any clearer.

Pinocchio Kelly, you should hide your head in shame

Anonymous said...

Stuart Glowie + Tom McCabe = Ex Councillor Richard Vassie.

Did you not know ?

Cllr Terry Kelly said...

(Anonymous) 19:31
“Couldn't be any clearer”

Well how silly of us, parents, teachers, councillors, supporters etc. etc. all looking at each other rather bemused, where did they pull that from then, only for another anonymous SNP coward to explain it the night before the meeting,

“occupancy means exactly the same thing as roll against capacity”

Well now we know right? no wonder you people won’t give your names.

Cllr Terry Kelly said...

anon 7.47 pm.

(Anonymous) 19:31

“Couldn't be any clearer”
Well how silly of us, parents, teachers, councillors, supporters etc. etc. all looking at each other rather bemused, where did they pull that from then, only for another anonymous SNP coward to explain it the night before the meeting,
“occupancy means exactly the same thing as roll against capacity”
Well now we know right? no wonder you people won’t give your names.

Cllr Terry Kelly said...

anon 7.47 pm.

Richard Vassie? is that right ? and who might you be ?

Jim Lewis said...

I'm sorry, Terry, but your assertion that the 'roll against capacity argument was introduced later is just untrue. I'm right now reading the original consultation document.
http://www.renfrewshire.gov.uk/ilwwcm/publishing.nsf/AttachmentsByTitle/ce-gm-ConsultationClosureSouthPS.pdf/$FILE/ce-gm-ConsultationClosureSouthPS.pdf

Page 3 deals with exactly this issue. Para 3.3 deals with costs, South's being 38% above average cost per pupil. Now if, as you claim, five schools are more expensive than that, it really is a cause for concern. One of the implications of that is that several schools would have to be well below the average cost. A useful exercise might be to identify those above and those below and see why there is such a difference. Leaving aside emotion for a moment, it's really hard to believe that the school which operates ate the lowest percentage occupancy can only be the sixth most expensive per pupil. Now, I hope you'll notice I'm not vcalling you a liar here, but I'd hope that you'd be of some help here. I'm finding it really difficult to find individual costings by school. I have found HMIE reports on the four schools in question and they're all pretty good. South isn't doing spectacularly better than any other. In fact, West comes out smelling slightly more of roses. That's not the whole issue, though. There is a fact her that seems to be missed. Despite all the rhetoric about thinking of the children and forgetting the cost, this is whether you like it or not taxpayers' money, and Renfrewshire's revenue comes from farther afield than the catchment area of South PS.

As for my invitation, I'll leave it open. I find you slightly dismissive, but that's OK. I would ahve thought, though, that the chance to find out for yourself what our club has done for a couple of YOUR constituents might be more attractive than poltical manoeuvring in another ward. What do I know?

Anonymous said...

Councillor Kelly,

I see "Anonymous is blaming one of Glenburn’s former councillors, who they say is contributing to your site, can the coward who feels that it is alright to simply blame a person but at the same time hide their own identification.

The SNP are rattled, injured and limping badly, they are a talentless bunch who will be swept of office soon enough.

So maybe the coward if they read this, maybe come forward and reveal themselves, if not get back under the rock from whence you came.

As quoted before "snake oil peddlers"

Scott Turner
Non SNP VOTER.

Jock said...

Terry,
liked the Trotsky quote. Leon's heid was certainly changed with a Stalinist ice-pick!
I think you are kidding yourself on about being an alleged "socialist". The Labour Party are only out to try and run capitalism better than the Tories, not actually get rid of a system which is fundamentally based on production for profit not human needs. No profit no production, witness the growing levels of unemployment (under Labour) which might possibly approach Thatcher levels in a year or two's time, who knows, its a crazy system. But this must be a figment of my fevered imagination, as the Great Leader Brown declared that Boom and Bust was over and had been consigned to the historical dustbin! Blair is regarded now as a warmonger and a liar, I think Brown will go down in history as a big-heided fool.

Cllr Terry Kelly said...

JIM LEWIS

You are way behind yet again Jim, I have read and reread the document as well as many others in the campaign group, there is no mention of “roll against capacity” in it they introduced this because they were getting taken apart by the parents. Had you been at today’s meeting where they closed the school you would have heard Labour challenge this phrase and claim that capacity is so difficult to measure that it was dropped by Glasgow City Council some time ago, more importantly no-one from the Council or the educational professionals was prepared to challenge this statement, “roll against capacity” was a diversion.

I made a slight mistake by saying there were 5 schools where it was more expensive to educate children in Renfrewshire than South Primary, there are in fact 4, guess what? This statement was also made today by Labour and again no-one from the council, elected member or officer was prepared to challenge it, am I getting through yet?

“poltical manoeuvring in another ward”
Jim, what did I say about trying not to make a clown of yourself? Is it laziness or stupidity?
West Primary, a good school, in line to take pupils from South Primary when it closes, thus increasing it’s roll and possibly it’s class sizes. That’s West Primary in ward 4 Paisley North West represented by 4 Cllrs. one of whom is Cllr. Terry Kelly (Labour)

Cllr Terry Kelly said...

(Anonymous) 14:20
This debate with reference to my blog has been characterised by the blatant cowardice of the SNP. It is obvious that they have been in collusion with one another and not one of them has the bottle to attach their name to the comments they make. This is because they know that their comments would be reported to the electorate and they don’t have the courage to stand up for their own opinions.

They call themselves Scottish Bravehearts you know, unable to face their constituents but ready to defeat the English with a few halfs in them, Pathetic.

Cllr Terry Kelly said...

(Jock) 15:59
Jock, I’ve no intention of debating this with you I’ve done it too often, suffice to say if you are not in the labour Party you are playing at it.

Jim Lewis said...

Um, maybe I'm missing something here. The document I provided a link to (and I notice you love to state facts without references Terry) actually uses the words 'roll' and 'capacity' to measure occupancy. Anyone reading this, please bear me out.


http://www.renfrewshire.gov.uk/ilwwcm/publishing.nsf/AttachmentsByTitle/ce-gm-ConsultationClosureSouthPS.pdf/$FILE/ce-gm-ConsultationClosureSouthPS.pdf


Now Terry, would it be too much to ask that you stop playing games and actually tell us where the 'public record' naming the other 5, sorry 4, schools ?

Alex said...

Are you completely thick?

Occupancy = roll against capacity.

You have either not read the document or you are happy to lie and mislead. there can be no other conclusion

Cllr Terry Kelly said...

(Jim Lewis) 18/12/08
It talks about roll and it talks about capacity but it does not put them into the formula that you are suggesting, that’s because it can’t be done. You can have several qualified people discussing capacity and they will come up with different numbers, that’s why I told you that Labour had made this point at the meeting and no one demurred, do I have to repeat everything for you.

I am not going to name any schools for you but, again I will repeat since it’s you I’m dealing with. Labour stated that there are 4 schools where teaching children is more expensive, again no one demurred, let me try to put it simpler for you, Labours argument on capacity and costs remains unchallenged by the SNP led council and the education officers. Is there any chance that you might grasp that ? it means we are right.

Cllr Terry Kelly said...

(Alex) 09:49
Labour stated that capacity was not a valid part of this formula, that’s why Glasgow City Council dropped it; different qualified people can and do come up with different numbers when discussing capacity.

When you are throwing around words like lie and mislead from your hiding place, perhaps you should consider the fact that no one at the meeting either SNP or officers argued against our position on capacity. Can you think of a reason why?

Anonymous said...

Scottish Bravehearts? The SNP?

You'd think then that Cllrs Kenny and Mags MacLaren would have been able to spell "Waverly", the iconic Scottish paddle steamer, correctly on the latest edition of their high-brow publication.

It's almost as easy as spelling "Westminster".

jim Lewis said...

Terry, the figure of 38% has been arrived at by dint of measuring roll against capacity. Now, you may very well be right. The figures given for capacity might be debatable, perhaps even wrong, but it's simply not true that roll against cacapity has not been used-not to use it would have rendered impossible the task of calculating percentage occupancy. What's more, it was used in the original consultation document.

I'd also like to challenge your use of logic. To suugest that you're proved right because nobody challenged defies any logic whatsoever.

Cllr Terry Kelly said...

(Anonymous) 13:43
Mr. & Mrs. McLaren SNP could be world champion spellers and they would still be politically illiterate.

Cllr Terry Kelly said...

(jim Lewis) 14:40
Labour accused them of using bogus methods to get the figure they wanted and they did not contest our assertion.

It really doesn’t matter what method they want to use, the method of using roll against capacity has been discredited and discarded by Glasgow City Council and no one in Renfrewshire Council, Councillor or officer was prepared to defend it.

I feel entitled to say we are right, it’s the very core of the argument and they didn’t feel confident enough to defend their methods, I think that’s quite conclusive, and logical.

It wasn’t until well into the campaign that the phrase surfaced and gave us the opportunity and impetus to research it and demolish its relevance.