De-Listing The Groves

[wrexview]

The Council want two primary schools on the Groves site. One of these appears to be a replacement for St. Mary’s Primary School, so although it may accommodate more children ,that would not create many new places . The other school has not be defined . It might be an extra Welsh medium primary or just an ordinary primary school. Faith and Welsh language schools do attract pupils from a wider catchment area so might well be full. A general primary school in the town centre could struggle to attract pupils.
There are schools, Dinas Bran being one example, where an English medium school also houses a Welsh wing. This model saves money by sharing facilities. There is plenty of room within The Groves for two primary schools with additions to be house in the current buildings. Have the Council got all interested parties around a table and explored the possibilities ? Have they costed the price of two new build schools and compared with refurbishing ? The quality of build and space provided also needs to taken into account. Victoria School was opened in 1901 and after refurbishment is still serving the 21st Century pupils well, Gwenfro and Hafod Y Wern built in the 1950’S are already been replaced. Maybe the Council could achieve its aim of two new schools earlier and cheaper by making best use of what they already own .

[Stoneagle]

MP1953 – I’ve done the survey yesterday (13th). It said that 62% of voters wanted to retain the school.

[PhilWynn]

Bitterly disappointed that the SOH lead campaigners are unwilling to share their new evidence, which was used to support Mark Drakeford’s decision to relist the Groves, even though they have stated it will stand up to Scrutiny and will ultimately defeat any repeat legal challenge.

That being the case why don’t they spare the Wrexham tax-payer the bill of a failed legal challenge? Maybe their loyalty isn’t to the Wrexham tax-payer but to the political elite in Cardiff Bay.

All we can now do is wait and see what the legal beagles recommend.

Cllr Phil Wynn

[Andrewmackembailey]

[quote quote=124205]Bitterly disappointed that the SOH lead campaigners are unwilling to share their new evidence, which was used to support Mark Drakeford’s decision to relist the Groves, even though they have stated it will stand up to Scrutiny and will ultimately defeat any repeat legal challenge.

That being the case why don’t they spare the Wrexham tax-payer the bill of a failed legal challenge? Maybe their loyalty isn’t to the Wrexham tax-payer but to the political elite in Cardiff Bay.

All we can now do is wait and see what the legal beagles recommend.

Cllr Phil Wynn

Phil
It is not SOH who need to save the taxpayers of Wrexham the bill of ” a failed legal challenge ” ( your words) as they do not support such a blind alleyway approach. That is entirely down to the executive board.
Why not as Wrexview says get all parties round the table to explore possibilities. That after all was the agreed Council policy iniated by your good friend Councillor Malcolm King when he was lead member in 2012 until the executive board ( I won’t say Council) unilaterally withdrew from discussion in November 2015.

[PhilWynn]

Andrew…more than happy to sit down and talk through the options with you, especially if you have the ear of the Welsh Labour Government Ministers.

There has to be a compromise that can keep everyone happy but then again that may well be wishful thinking on my part.

Phil

[zinger]

For Goodness sake. They made an excellent job of saving the frontage of the War Memorial Hospital. I have never heard one solitary word saying otherwise. Where is the difference?

[Author]

Posts