More than 100 schools told to close buildings over safety fears

Casdon

growstuff

I'm still not sure about that Casdon. Most of the schools are academies, so Essex County Council wouldn't have been responsible for the surveys.

As I mentioned before, Essex has more schools than almost any other county. I'm familiar with a number of the schools affected and they're in areas which experience huge population growth in the post war years. Most of the schools were put up cheaply to cope with the growth and ROSLA. Nearly all the secondary schools are former secondary moderns, which replaced delapidated elementary schools. They were usually built in the same style.

I guess we'll just have to wait for the final tally. Hopefully, it won't be 10% across the country, but it's not going to be a small number.

I don’t know either growstuff, I just doubt that Essex is unique in having either lots of academies or high population growth. I’m a cynic I think, but my gut tells me there will be many, many more.

It's not unique, but I do know that Essex experience a much higher than average post war population growth, as people moved out of London to places within commutable distance.

Incidentally, Essex was the first county to opt out of local authority control on a mass scale. I don't think it even has any secondary schools left which aren't academies. In any case, academisation isn't that relevant. These schools were built before they became academies, but control over the buildings was handed over to the academies.

Im sure you’re right, I just think there will be loads more. I would imagine this is going to turn into a bureaucratic nightmare for the government actually, if all academies have to seek funding through that one central route - prioritisation will be a nightmare. At least in Wales if we end up with a lot of affected schools there will be a prioritisation process at LA level as we are lucky enough not to have academies.

I expect there will be loads more. If it does turn out to be 10%, it will be more than a nightmare!

Academies are responsible for their own buildings, so have to pay for surveys and maintenance etc. However, the issue is that no school (whether academy or local authority maintained) has enough money for complete rebuilds. There has always been a special fund, controlled by the DfE.

Some of these schools have already applied for funding in the last few years because they identified that parts of the building are unsafe, but they were turned down. Some were due for replacement under Building Schools for the Future, but Gove pulled the funding.

I've looked at a map of the Essex schools affected. Many of them are clustered around Colchester, so some parts of the county aren't affected.

Not seen any mention of independent schools with RAAC.
I wonder how many......

GrannyGravy13

growstuff

At least 54 of them are situated in Essex.

Source:

www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-66681227

Essex County Council has 647 schools (not counting the ones in Thurrock and Southend), so nearly 10% are affected in some way.

Yes as I said upthread one is extremely close to me, only having Yr 7 and Yr 11 on-site (unless that has changed since this morning)

Have Y7 and Y11 returned to school a day earlier than the rest of the year groups? They do this in some schools so the new Y7s can be shown around by older pupils.

I've just discovered that one local secondary school has just finished extensive work to reinforce 1000m2 of ceiling, one primary school has been shut forever (they knew about RAAC in April) and one Southend Primary was closed at the end of last term with pupils' being sent to a number of neighbouring schools.

Why did it take so long for the news to break and warnings issued to other schools?

I've looked at a map of the Essex schools affected. Many of them are clustered around Colchester...

Looking at the list of Colchester secondary schools I'm surprised that so few are affected (2). There was a big increase in population after I left in the early 70s. How long did councils go on building schools containing RAAC, I wonder.

MaizieD

^I've looked at a map of the Essex schools affected. Many of them are clustered around Colchester...^

Looking at the list of Colchester secondary schools I'm surprised that so few are affected (2). There was a big increase in population after I left in the early 70s. How long did councils go on building schools containing RAAC, I wonder.

It was eventually banned in the mid 90s. A lot of schools were built in that area in the 70s and 80s - and they all look the same, so almost certainly had the same design.

I counted nine schools in Colchester or very near.

I counted nine schools in Colchester or very near.

Mostly primaries, though. Only 2 secondaries. As I say, that surprised me.

My old secondary school was late 50s build, so possibly escaped, but I know a few were built later.

The school I went to in London has got it, but the affected area has been sealed off and the school isn't closed. It was built around 1960.

I’ve just found a list of the hospitals in England that are being rebuilt too, courtesy of the South Wales Argus.

‘The NHS has been surveying sites and carrying out Raac mitigation work since 2019.

Almost £700 million has been allocated for this work between 2021 and 2025, enabling trusts to put in place remediation and failsafe measures, with a goal of eradicating Raac from NHS buildings entirely by 2035.

Hospitals to be rebuilt due to Raac concerns
Seven hospitals in England are set to be rebuilt due to Raac concerns.

These hospitals are:

Airedale
Queen Elizabeth King’s Lynn
Hinchingbrooke
Mid Cheshire Leighton
Frimley Park
West Suffolk Hospital
James Paget Hospital in Great Yarmouth’

Just said on the news review that the triple lock is under threat again because pensioners shouldn’t be protected when schools are crumbling. Not sure which newspaper it was in. Seems like everything is now the fault of the elderly. Again

MayBee70

Just said on the news review that the triple lock is under threat again because pensioners shouldn’t be protected when schools are crumbling. Not sure which newspaper it was in. Seems like everything is now the fault of the elderly. Again

Well that’s a surprise isn’t it Maybee, (tongue firmly in cheek). This government is not going to be satisfied with having one of the lowest state pension rates in Europe, they want to let it fall even further behind. In fact I don’t think they’ll be satisfied until they’ve got the workhouses up and running again. I’m sure some bright spark is probably working on it right now.

This government is not going to be satisfied with having one of the lowest state pension rates in Europe, they want to let it fall even further behind.
To be fair, isn't that because in a country, say like France, people pay higher than average taxes? (I know I was shocked). If more is taken from you while working, you also know you will be recompensed when you are a pensioner because a new generation will provide the public purse to do this. You can't have it both ways.

Joseann

^This government is not going to be satisfied with having one of the lowest state pension rates in Europe, they want to let it fall even further behind.^
To be fair, isn't that because in a country, say like France, people pay higher than average taxes? (I know I was shocked). If more is taken from you while working, you also know you will be recompensed when you are a pensioner because a new generation will provide the public purse to do this. You can't have it both ways.

As taxation doesn't fund spending, but arises from spending, this is not a relevant argument.

MaizieD

Joseann

This government is not going to be satisfied with having one of the lowest state pension rates in Europe, they want to let it fall even further behind.
To be fair, isn't that because in a country, say like France, people pay higher than average taxes? (I know I was shocked). If more is taken from you while working, you also know you will be recompensed when you are a pensioner because a new generation will provide the public purse to do this. You can't have it both ways.

As taxation doesn't fund spending, but arises from spending, this is not a relevant argument.

Yes, but pledges not to raise taxes means that spending doesn't rise.
If it does the National Debt just becomes even larger.

We need to spend more - there is so much infrastructure that needs replacing for a start and taxes will have to rise.

nightowl

MayBee70

Just said on the news review that the triple lock is under threat again because pensioners shouldn’t be protected when schools are crumbling. Not sure which newspaper it was in. Seems like everything is now the fault of the elderly. Again

Well that’s a surprise isn’t it Maybee, (tongue firmly in cheek). This government is not going to be satisfied with having one of the lowest state pension rates in Europe, they want to let it fall even further behind. In fact I don’t think they’ll be satisfied until they’ve got the workhouses up and running again. I’m sure some bright spark is probably working on it right now.

Remember those things the used to have in workhouses where men would walk on a sort of treadmill type thing which served absolutely no purpose? Well, they could devise something to put pensioners on that would generate energy so we would be benefitting society in some way….I’m sure they’ll be working on it.

MayBee70

nightowl

MayBee70

Just said on the news review that the triple lock is under threat again because pensioners shouldn’t be protected when schools are crumbling. Not sure which newspaper it was in. Seems like everything is now the fault of the elderly. Again

Well that’s a surprise isn’t it Maybee, (tongue firmly in cheek). This government is not going to be satisfied with having one of the lowest state pension rates in Europe, they want to let it fall even further behind. In fact I don’t think they’ll be satisfied until they’ve got the workhouses up and running again. I’m sure some bright spark is probably working on it right now.

Remember those things the used to have in workhouses where men would walk on a sort of treadmill type thing which served absolutely no purpose? Well, they could devise something to put pensioners on that would generate energy so we would be benefitting society in some way….I’m sure they’ll be working on it.

Because hospitals are crumbling and falling down I heard a rumour that there is going to be a strict cut-off age for admissions.

That'll sort us and save on pensions.

MaizieD

Joseann

This government is not going to be satisfied with having one of the lowest state pension rates in Europe, they want to let it fall even further behind.
To be fair, isn't that because in a country, say like France, people pay higher than average taxes? (I know I was shocked). If more is taken from you while working, you also know you will be recompensed when you are a pensioner because a new generation will provide the public purse to do this. You can't have it both ways.

As taxation doesn't fund spending, but arises from spending, this is not a relevant argument.

Oh Maisie. You saying "this is not a relevant argument" doesn't make it so to the vast majority who still believe it is relevant.

DaisyAnneReturns

MaizieD

Joseann

This government is not going to be satisfied with having one of the lowest state pension rates in Europe, they want to let it fall even further behind.
To be fair, isn't that because in a country, say like France, people pay higher than average taxes? (I know I was shocked). If more is taken from you while working, you also know you will be recompensed when you are a pensioner because a new generation will provide the public purse to do this. You can't have it both ways.

As taxation doesn't fund spending, but arises from spending, this is not a relevant argument.

Oh Maisie. You saying "this is not a relevant argument" doesn't make it so to the vast majority who still believe it is relevant.

So how do you square that with the admiration so many hold for countries with high rates of taxation and excellent public services?

Could you please explain in simple language for those who do not follow Saint Richard Murphy?

DaisyAnneReturns

MaizieD

Joseann

This government is not going to be satisfied with having one of the lowest state pension rates in Europe, they want to let it fall even further behind.
To be fair, isn't that because in a country, say like France, people pay higher than average taxes? (I know I was shocked). If more is taken from you while working, you also know you will be recompensed when you are a pensioner because a new generation will provide the public purse to do this. You can't have it both ways.

As taxation doesn't fund spending, but arises from spending, this is not a relevant argument.

Oh Maisie. You saying "this is not a relevant argument" doesn't make it so to the vast majority who still believe it is relevant.

Are you insulting my intelligence DaisyAnneReturns? MaizieD always gives a
straight answer to a question, (and you will notice the ? sign in my post!). I am sure MaizieD isn't at all worried what I make of her answer, nor whether I believe it is relevant. She was not mocking, and I am grateful for her explanations.

Yes, but pledges not to raise taxes means that spending doesn't rise.
If it does the National Debt just becomes even larger.

With respect, you, and others, are not thinking this through. There seems to be a belief that state spending means pouring money into a big black hole and it is never seen again.

Who is in receipt of the state spending? In the first case, it is spent on wages and goods and services that the state requires. Wages are subject to income tax, and are spent into the economy, either on goods which are subject to taxation, or if non VATable, the companies that supply them will be subject to tax on their profits. The companies which the state purchases from directly will, unless they are foreign companies, also be subject to UK taxation. Of course, the supplying companies will also employ people, whose wages will also be taxed, and who will also spend their wages into the economy. So, state spending will automatically generate tax revenue.
Some of the money might be saved by its recipients, but when they eventually spend it, it will be taxed in one way or another. It just won't immediately return to the state.

I would answer Joseann's specific worry about a shrinking working population supporting the non working population in the same way. People in receipt of state pensions and benefits also spend their money into the economy, so it's subject to taxation in the same way. Some (quite a few) pensioners pay income tax, too.

The point is that, unlike a household, the state doesn't have to earn its money before it can spend it. As the the only legal creator of money it can spend before it taxes.

I was going to say there, like a household or a company etc. But a company, if it wants to expand, invest in new plant and workers, usually borrows the money it needs for expansion and pays it back over time. It doesn't wait until its customers have spent enough with them to finance the new investment. And the money that it borrows to fund its plans is usually from a bank, which creates the money for the loan. Mortgages work in the same way.

The money that the state 'borrows' is in the form of gilts (government bonds) , premium bonds and National savings products. The people or institutions which purchase these products don't particularly want their money back, they want a steady income from the interest paid on them (or, in the case of gilts, they may want to speculate with them by selling them at a profit in the secondary market). They know that if they did need to cash them in the state will always repay the original purchase price because it cannot run out of money. In the meantime, the money they have invested with the government is available for the government to spend..

I appreciate that this is a bit of a simplistic explanation, particularly where the financial markets are concerned, but it is how government finance works.

I am sure MaizieD isn't at all worried what I make of her answer, nor whether I believe it is relevant. She was not mocking, and I am grateful for her explanations.

Thank you, Joseann

I do follow your reasoned explanations, MaizieD but why is the national debt getting bigger and what is going to happen if so many public buildings are going to have to be replaced?

Where are they going to get the builders from for a start?

And that's why I'm surprised the government hasn't increased the limit on Premium Bonds from £50,000.
Not everyone wants to lock money away for a set time period.