Toxteth: Anger at school plans for African Caribbean centre site
Trustees of a community centre have said they will fight plans to build a new girls school on its site.Plans are expected to be agreed at a cabinet meeting later to see an all-girls Muslim faith school built on site of the African Caribbean Centre Liverpool off Upper Parliament Street.The team running the centre in Toxteth said the council must not "drive a wedge" between different members of the city's most diverse area in its effort to create much-needed school places.The council said the site had been identified as it met the urgent need for secondary school places in a poorly-served part of Liverpool.
Caribbean centre trustee Andrea Baz said there had been a lack of consultation."This has happened so quickly, they're pushing it through," she said."We are not happy – it's never been clear to us that this was the site being proposed for the new school."We have no knowledge of the Caribbean site being put forward. Nobody is happy."We are a cohesive community and what Liverpool City Council is trying to do is drive a wedge between all the different cultures within Toxteth."This community centre is used by everybody – people have grown up here."
There is huge demand for secondary school places in Liverpool and a shortage of supply which the city has said would be critical in 2026.Councillor Nick Small, cabinet member for growth and economy, admitted landing on a permanent home for the school that met the various criteria had proven to be "very difficult."According to a cabinet report which will go before members later, the Department for Education (DfE) identified L7/L8/L15 postcode areas as the required geographic search area for the new school.It is thought the first intake for the school year 2026/27 could take more than 120 pupils at the facility operated by Star Academies.The board of the African Caribbean Centre has launched an online petition garnering almost 3,000 signatures in opposition to the plans, which it says will displace the city's black community.Council officials said they would engage with representatives from the African Caribbean community to identify alternative provision which met local need, either on the existing site or nearby.Councillor Lila Bennett, cabinet member for employment, educational attainment and skills said: "In our meetings with the African Caribbean Centre's leaders, we have reinforced our commitment to providing improved modern facilities which meet the community's needs."
Listen to the best of BBC Radio Merseyside on BBC Sounds and follow BBC Merseyside on Facebook, X, and Instagram, and watch BBC North West Tonight on BBC iPlayer.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Spectator
10 hours ago
- Spectator
How the ‘experts' got the grooming gang scandal so wrong
At this stage we can't predict what the government's new grooming gangs inquiry will say. But one thing is overwhelmingly likely: many will feel the heat. This includes police who stood back in the face of clear patterns of child sexual exploitation by young Pakistani men to avoid racial tension; social workers desperate not to offend their largely unassimilated Muslim clients; and councillors and politicians who said 'move on, nothing to see here' because of fears that Muslim voters might disown anyone who rocked the multicultural boat. With few exceptions, academics were some of the keenest to suppress discussion about groooming gang abusers' origins or ethnicity Even more interesting, however, is the light all this this has thrown on academia. With few exceptions, academics were some of the keenest to suppress discussion about the abusers' origins or ethnicity. Any reference to this, it was constantly said, risked spreading anti-Muslim racism, distracting attention from more important problems, 'racialising crime', ''othering' South Asian men' and characterising them as 'folk devils'. Paper after paper, seminar after seminar, was devoted to pushing variants on these themes. At first sight this looks odd. Police and social services at least had an incentive to make their jobs easier; so too politicians anxious about their voter base. But academics with no skin in this game? Why should they engage so hard in support of one side? Partly, one suspects, this may be due to the university environment. Ten years ago, a survey found 77 per cent of academics backed Labour, the Lib Dems or the Greens. Only 11 per cent were for the Tories. Today, the figure is possibly even more skewed. This doesn't just mean many academics are instinctively likely to support an approach based on racial identity politics. More seriously, all articles have to be peer reviewed. Peer reviewers within the humanities professoriate are only human. With the best will in the world, one suspects an article trying to minimise the relevance of ethnicity in favour of other factors is likely in practice to get an easier ride. But there is more to it than this. Few admit it, but there is something of a Faustian pact between universities and their state funders and providers of research grants, built on the fiction that in the humanities as much as in traditional sciences the state is investing in cutting-edge advances in knowledge. As a result, today's humanities academics, especially young ones with careers to make or lose, are pressured not only to produce more papers, but also to make their publications 'innovative', and in addition to strive for what is referred to as 'impact', a somewhat protean term that essentially means getting noticed by the great and the good. There are, put bluntly, big brownie points in getting called before a parliamentary committee or quango. The resulting incentive is baneful and perverse. Far from encouraging people to take a sober look at subjects like the sex grooming figures in Rochdale or Oldham and propose low-key, possibly unpalatable, measures to deal with them, the ambitious academic is much better advised to take a different, radical, line – indeed, the more radical the better. Much more attractive to university managers is the construction of new narratives based on theories of the impact of systemic racism or racist media, or on abstract notions of the 'othering' of particular groups. And there is the bonus that if you have radical ideas you're more likely to gain impact by being invited to address that parliamentary committee. This isn't necessarily to criticise the academics concerned. As often as not they have little choice but to promote their increasingly abstract and abtruse theories (many of which are intellectually dodgy owing to their tenuous link with empiricism and regular adoption of incomprehensible and conclusory jargon, but that's another story). But this phenomenon does have one very important result. Fifty years or so ago academics commanded a natural respect. If a professor pronounced on a social problem, with a few exceptions what they said was probably understandable to a layperson, soundly anchored in empiricism, and demonstrative of common sense. This was what made people take notice and take what they said seriously. Today, academics increasingly sound like just another part of the progressive commentariat, albeit with an annoying habit of unashamedly using increasingly esoteric words and, when challenged, insisting that it's not surprising we can't understand their high-powered science. That is their right. But there is also another side to this. If academics go down this road, they have little if any right to respect for their opinionated ramblings, and no particular claim to be listened to by government. We can only hope that the members of the grooming gang inquiry have the good sense to keep this in mind, and treat the earnest pronouncements of the new professoriate with the pointed scepticism they deserve.
NBC News
a day ago
- NBC News
Pakistan to nominate Trump for Nobel Peace Prize
Pakistan said on Saturday it would recommend U.S. President Donald Trump for the Nobel Peace Prize, an accolade that he has said he craves, for his work in helping to resolve the recent conflict between India and Pakistan. Some analysts in Pakistan said the move might persuade Trump to think again about potentially joining Israel in striking Iran's nuclear facilities. Pakistan has condemned Israel's action as a violation of international law and a threat to regional stability. In May, a surprise announcement by Trump of a ceasefire brought an abrupt end to a four-day conflict between nuclear-armed foes India and Pakistan. Trump has since repeatedly said that he averted a nuclear war, saved millions of lives, and grumbled that he got no credit for it. Pakistan agrees that U.S. diplomatic intervention ended the fighting, but India says it was a bilateral agreement between the two militaries. 'President Trump demonstrated great strategic foresight and stellar statesmanship through robust diplomatic engagement with both Islamabad and New Delhi, which de-escalated a rapidly deteriorating situation,' Pakistan said. 'This intervention stands as a testament to his role as a genuine peacemaker.' Governments can nominate people for the Nobel Peace Prize. There was no immediate response from Washington. A spokesperson for the Indian government did not respond to a request for comment. Trump has repeatedly said that he's willing to mediate between India and Pakistan over the disputed Kashmir region, their main source of enmity. Islamabad, which has long called for international attention to Kashmir, is delighted. But his stance has upended U.S. policy in South Asia, which had favored India as a counterweight to China, and put in question previously close relations between Trump and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi. In a social media post, opens new tab on Friday, Trump gave a long list of conflicts he said he had resolved, including India and Pakistan and the Abraham accords in his first term between Israel and some Muslim-majority countries. He added: 'I won't get a Nobel Peace Prize no matter what I do.' Pakistan's move to nominate Trump came in the same week its army chief, Field Marshal Asim Munir, met the U.S. leader for lunch. It was the first time that a Pakistani military leader had been invited to the White House when a civilian government was in place in Islamabad. Trump's planned meeting with Modi at the G7 summit in Canada last week did not take place after the U.S. president left early, but the two later spoke by phone, in which Modi said 'India does not and will never accept mediation' in its dispute with Pakistan, according to the Indian government. Mushahid Hussain, a former chair of the Senate Defence Committee in Pakistan's parliament, suggested nominating Trump for the peace prize was justified.' Trump is good for Pakistan,' he said. 'If this panders to Trump's ego, so be it. All the European leaders have been sucking up to him big time.' But the move was not universally applauded in Pakistan, where Trump's support for Israel's war in Gaza has inflamed passions. 'Israel's sugar daddy in Gaza and cheerleader of its attacks on Iran isn't a candidate for any prize,' said Talat Hussain, a prominent Pakistani television political talk show host, in a post on X. 'And what if he starts to kiss Modi on both cheeks again after a few months?'
Evening Standard
a day ago
- Evening Standard
A Different Kind of Power review: Jacinda Ardern's political memoir is merely a warm embrace
She is indeed a hugger. Her most famous moment was when she hugged victims of the anti-Muslim Christchurch attack, and she started hugging as a young teenager when she visited two girls whose brother had killed himself. It's absolutely fine to be expressive in your sympathies, so long as you don't think this is the sole marker of authenticity, but you get the impression there's not an awful lot more to Ardern's politics.
