8 Minutes to Oxted

RuthandAndy · Joined: 11 Dec 2007 Posts: 8

One thing that caught my ear during one of Paul D's radio spots with Ken Rimington was where he says that it is believed that some of SCC's councillors had a vested interest in keeping the areas to the north of the M25 out of the equation.

The inference seemed to be that the said councillors had targeted our area in order to ensure that their area remains within the catchment area.

I would not be surprised if this was the case, but what evidence do we have that this is the case? If we have something concrete, this could blow the arguments put forward in the consultation document out of the water.

Redmond · Joined: 11 Dec 2007 Posts: 14

I'm not sure we have any evidence that they have a vested interest. However I am sure our barrister must be able to use the information that Lingfield has only got Ken Rimmington, and the other councillors are to the north.

8MinuteMan · Joined: 07 Dec 2007 Posts: 12 Location: Lingfield

To me it would seem that the only real inference would could draw on this would be where they live. They may wish to maximise the choice of schooling for theirs and their constituents children - ie greater opportunity of choice of / quality schooling to potential purchasers if they sell their houses.

I am currently putting a list of all County Councillors details into a spread sheet so that we can map where they all live and how much they may possibly understand about our location.

Alan Erskine · Joined: 05 Jan 2008 Posts: 1

There is anecdotal evidence for councillors of all types protecting their own interests although it would be mpossible to prove such things. However, with the "area to the North" arguement in mind a little bit of research throws up some interesting points. In terms of distance Lingfield is about 3 miles from Imberhorne and Sackville. Tatsfield is 1.5 miles from Charles Darwin (Bromley), Woldingham is 2.5 miles from Warlingham and De Stafford and 3.5 miles from Cousldon and Riddlesdown. I find it interesting that Surrey County Coucil are acccepting sending our kids out of county (at odds with their responsibility to offer a place to all surrey kids in a Surrey school) but have not considered that an equally viable solution to the Ajudicators requirement for a revised catchment area has not been considered at all.

RuthandAndy · Joined: 11 Dec 2007 Posts: 8

Alan,

Thanks for that. I think this is a key point of our argument. The consultation document makes no reference, AFAIK, to the areas to the north of Oxted having schools closer to them and also a wider choice within the county.

Debbie Marshall · Joined: 10 Dec 2007 Posts: 9 Location: Lingfield

There are a number of other primary schools that feed into Oxted and who are currently within the catchment area. Some of them actually have 2 Surrey schools closer to them than Oxted, yet they are trying to take our closest Surrey school away.

There is no logic to this, which I pointed out to Andrew Crisp at our meeting with him. I worked out the closest schools to all the primary schools in the catchment prior to the meeting - I will post them for your interest as soon as I have a minute.

Debbie