Parents in limbo over future of Queensway Primary School in Yeadon
Parents and staff at a primary school which was under threat of closure say they have been left in limbo over its long-term future.Queensway Primary School in Yeadon, Leeds, was due to shut at the end of the school year due to financial pressures and the low number of five-year-olds in the area.Despite those plans being put on hold by Leeds City Council last month, the authority said a further report on options for the school's future was being drawn up.Meanwhile, parent Lyndsey Cope said she had been "sick with worry" over the school's fate and the council needed to "act fast".
The Labour-led council had agreed in March to press ahead with permanently shutting the school.But the plans were put on hold after parents launched a legal challenge based on on "significant flaws in the consultation process".
However, since the decision was reversed, parents said there had been no indication on when the matter would be finally resolved. Sibel, whose child attends Queensway, said the whole process had been "emotionally draining"."The council have no idea how much damage they've done to my whole family."The time I've wasted worrying about my son's future... and the impact it's had on his older brother who has also been worrying about his little brother."She added: "The council needs to do the right thing now and support our school."
Rick, another parent of a six-year-old pupil, said: "Leeds Council now has the chance to make up for all their failings on this issue but must do immediately and sincerely and go on the record now to state they will not look to close Queensway ever again." Lisa Lavelle, learning support assistant in social, emotional and mental health provision at Queensway, said the effect it had had on children, staff and the whole community had been "unacceptable"."The lack of transparency and understanding from the council's assessment team is extremely worrying," she said.At the council's latest executive board meeting, Councillor Alan Lamb, leader of the Conservative group, said the "pain and distress" caused to the school, staff, pupils and wider community was "enormous".He added: "We need to give absolute clarity and certainty to them as soon as possible."The authority's leader James Lewis said the council was sorry for the distress caused, adding: "I'll be very clear that we will learn from how we got here."He added: "We will bring a further paper forward soon proposing next steps and time will be taken to consider all possible options before coming back to the executive board."
Listen to highlights from West Yorkshire on BBC Sounds, catch up with the latest episode of Look North.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Record
16 minutes ago
- Daily Record
Mixed reaction from politicians to news Galloway will not become national park
The decision was slammed by Labour's Colin Smyth, while Tories Finlay Carson and John Cooper criticised the NatureScot consultation. There has been a mixed reaction from politicians to the news that Galloway will not become Scotland's third national park. The decision was slammed by Labour's Colin Smyth, while Tories Finlay Carson and John Cooper criticised the NatureScot consultation. The SNP's Emma Harper believed the decision showed the Scottish Government had listened to local people. Reacting to Thursday's announcement from Rural Affairs Secretary Mairi Gougeon at Holyrood, South Scotland MSP Mr Smyth said: 'For too long, Galloway has been Scotland's forgotten corner – and the government made it clear it wants to tear down the 'Welcome to Dumfries and Galloway' signs and put up 'No Entry' instead. 'The Cabinet Secretary knows she could've brought forward plans for Galloway that supported farming and forestry and helped them thrive. She could have built something special. Made a change for the better. Instead, she has taken the easy way out and walked away. 'The government has failed to set out an alternative to its inaction. No plan B to fix a local economy built on low pay. No action to stop the fastest depopulation in mainland Scotland'. 'This isn't just about ditching a national park – this is about ditching Galloway's future.' The Tories were critical of the consultation process. Dumfries and Galloway MP, Mr Cooper, said: 'The consultation on a Galloway National Park was deeply flawed – it was always far too vague. 'And while I raised right at the start questions about what weighting would be given to the opinions of those living in Dumfries and Galloway compared to those outwith, I never got a satisfactory answer. 'There were attempts to portray the 'blank sheet of paper' approach of the consultation as a good thing, but it was nebulous, and led to claim and counterclaim about what a Galloway National Park might be like. 'Galloway is not like the other two parks – our hills have hill farms, not just hillwalkers – and no way should remote and distant national park bureaucrats be anywhere near decisions on some of the most productive grassland in the UK. 'Agriculture is the backbone of the economy in Dumfries and Galloway, and it's not just about farmers and stockmen – it's about the hundreds of jobs in associated businesses, from seed merchants to machinery firms, to accountants who do the books.' Galloway and West Dumfries MSP Mr Carson added: 'The government's handling of the national park selection process has been opaque, inconsistent, and dismissive of genuine local engagement. 'Communities across Galloway invested time, energy, and hope into a process which could and should have united communities, but that process was poorly communicated and ultimately felt predetermined. 'Rather than fostering trust and collaboration, the Government's approach has sown division and confusion. It has left many wondering whether rural voices are truly being heard in this parliament. 'We could have avoided months of uncertainty and frustration. We should have had an independent review of the existing parks so that lessons could be learned.' Naturecot's consultation revealed the majority of people who responded were from the area that would be covered by the national park, with 54 per cent of respondents against the idea. South Scotland MSP Emma Harper said: 'Too often the Scottish Government and its agencies are accused of not listening to the voices of the people, so I hope those accusations can be brought to a peep now that the consultation process has been shown to be open, transparent and fair, and was one of the major factors determining the Government's decision. 'Going forward we need to strike the right balance between biodiversity, the natural environment, tourism and the economic development all of our communities are striving for regardless of their views on the park itself. 'I firmly believe that whatever views each of us held on the proposals that were on the table and expressed through the consultation process, we all collectively need to work together on how we develop Galloway economically, socially, and culturally over the years and decades ahead. 'That work would require to be done regardless of whether national park status was a reality, but now the decision has been made it's more relevant and urgent than ever.'
Daily Record
an hour ago
- Daily Record
Perthshire MPs clash over short-term lets and second homes issue
The region has 1083 second homes and 1875 STL licences - 2958 combined or 3.89 per cent out of 76,136 dwellings. Perth and Kinross MSPs clashed this week over the issue of second homes and short term lets in the region which are more than twice the national average. Green MSP Mark Ruskell insisted tax rises on the wealthy would reduce the number of second homes and short-term lets and tackle the housing crisis, but Conservative Murdo Fraser said the solution was building more houses in rural areas and accused his Mid Scotland and Fife colleague of wishing to punish second home owners. According to Scottish Government 2024 figures second homes and short term lets in Perth and Kinross make up 3.9 per cent of all housing in the area - more than double the national average of 1.8 per cent. The region has 1083 second homes and 1875 STL licences - 2958 combined or 3.89 per cent out of 76,136 dwellings. As of March 2023 there were 3312 people on the application list for social housing in Perth and Kinross with an average of 1000 properties becoming available for rent each year. Mr Ruskell pointed out that tax rises on the wealthy would reduce the number of second homes and short-term lets in Perth and Kinross. He commented: 'The fact that we have just under 3,000 second homes and short term lets in Perth and Kinross, which is more than double the national average is a major reason why this crisis is so much worse locally. 'Wealthy people buying up properties they won't live in are pushing out young families in particular. 'These houses either lie empty for most of the year as holiday homes, or they are hoarded by landlords making a fortune from Airbnb-style short term lets. Either way, its first-time buyers who are pushed out by those with much more financial muscle. 'This is a crisis which can clearly be solved. We'll only do that by taking on the wealthy few, those who pay very little tax while hoovering up the houses which other people need. 'The Scottish Government must listen to us and act boldly to stop the hollowing out of our communities.' But Mr Fraser said: 'With their customary attachment to the politics of envy, the Scottish Greens want to punish second home owners by fleecing them for even more tax. 'This will do nothing to solve the housing crisis in rural areas, which can only be fixed by more house building in the private and social rented sectors - and this means a new policy approach in terms of planning, infrastructure and incentives. 'Sadly whilst the Greens were in Government in coalition with the SNP they did nothing to fix these fundamental issues, and instead now resort to cheap headlines.' A Scottish Government spokesperson said this week: 'Tackling the housing emergency remains an urgent priority for the Scottish Government and we are supporting local authorities to quickly identify properties and bring them back into use. 'We recognise that local areas have different housing needs, which is why we legislated to give councils the power to levy higher council tax on second homes and empty properties. 'Giving councils these levers can help create a fairer housing and taxation system and ensures they have the flexibility to strike the right balance in the use of housing to meet local needs and to support thriving communities. 'Our £3.7 million investment has so far brought almost 11,000 privately owned homes back into use since 2010 and we will invest a further £2 million next year to help councils unlock barriers and develop a targeted approach to empty homes.'
The Guardian
an hour ago
- The Guardian
Keir Starmer refuses to set date for UK to spend 3% of GDP on defence
Keir Starmer has refused to give a date for the UK to spend at least 3% of GDP on defence, saying he would not indulge in 'performative fantasy politics', as he prepared to launch the government's strategic defence review. Speaking at a defence facility in Scotland, the prime minister said his commitment to hit 2.5% of GDP on defence spending from 2027 showed he was serious about the issue, but that he could not go further without fiscal certainty. 'I am not, as the prime minister of Labour government, going to make a commitment as to the precise date until I can be sure precisely where the money is coming from, how we can make good on that commitment, because I don't believe in performative fantasy politics, and certainly not on defence and security,' he told BBC Radio 4's Today programme. Pressed again on the date, Starmer said: 'We had a commitment for 2.5% by the end of this parliament. We pulled that right forward to 2027. We showed that when we say there's a new era of the defence and security of our country, is our first priority – as it is – that we meant it. We take the same approach to 3%. 'But I'm not going to indulge in the fantasy politics of simply plucking dates from the air until I'm absolutely clear that I can sit here in an interview with you and tell you exactly how that's going to work.' The defence review will say Britain must be ready to fight a war in Europe or the Atlantic, though it is not expected to promise immediate increases in the size of the armed forces to deal with the threat. The 130-page document will call for a move to 'war-fighting readiness' to deter Russian aggression in Europe and increases in stockpiles of arms and support equipment, some of which currently may only last days in a crisis. Asked about this, Starmer said: 'We have to recognise the world has changed, and if the world has changed, we need to be ready. What I would say, by way of reassurance, is if you want to deter conflict, then the best way to do that is to prepare for conflict.' Questioned on whether this could involve, for example, British troops being sent to defend attacks on countries adjoining Russia, Starmer replied: 'I very much hope not. And in order to make sure that that isn't the case, we need to prepare. But we cannot ignore the threat that Russia poses. 'We've seen what's happened in Ukraine just over three and a half, three years ago, those tanks rolled across a border, something I think all of us thought we wouldn't really see in our lifetimes – the invasion of a European country. Russia has so shown in recent weeks that it's not serious about peace. We have to be ready.' The review is not expected to contain any additional spending commitments. The defence secretary, John Healey, acknowledged on Sunday that any plans to increase the size of the British army, at its smallest for 300 years, would have to wait until after the next election. Speaking to the BBC, Healey said there had been '15 years of a recruitment and retention crisis in our armed forces' as he acknowledged that the size of the army had fallen to 70,860, below the government's target of 73,000.
