Home > News >

New Garnock Academy: Pupil says it will be "a complete waste of taxpayer's money"

4 Feb 2010
In September of last year we received the news that a brand new Garnock Academy will be built. North Ayrshire Council will fund one-third of the cost of the capital project while the Scottish Government will provide the remaining bulk of it.

At the time, we had a lively discussion about the topic here on s1kilbirnie. Recently, Ryan Crombie, a 6th year pupil at Garnock, posted a comment to the original story.

Ryan Crombie says:
I have to say that I am not happy with the news of a new Garnock Academy being built. I must point out that I feel that this is a complete waste of taxpayer's money. Allow me to explain: Over the last ten years, North Ayrshire Council has spent over 9 MILLION POUNDS on improving facilities within the school. Most recently spending 3m on Lifts and Double-Glazing windows. I feel that a new school is not the answer for the apparently 'tired school buildings'. Instead I feel that the school should be renovated and modernised. Wouldn't this save a lot of money? The school itself isn't in that bad of a condition, it just needs some TLC.

I am currently a 6th year pupil at Garnock and all the members of staff agree with what I'm saying but refuse to sign a petition because 'It's North Ayrshire Council that pay our wages' they say. Kilbirnie main town is in desperate need of re-generating and we really do need a new police station. One often reads of the lack of funds for these projects, yet North Ayrshire council thinks it's acceptable to spend millions on a school for it to just simply be demolished. It is an outrage that the council can do these things!

What do you think of Ryan's argument?
Add a comment

4 Feb 2010 | 11:55:44

Derek Clarkson says

You have to balance the cost of running a run down decrepit, energy wasting building against the cost of building and running a new, modern, energy efficient building over a 30 year cycle.

We should welcome the new school and the employment benefits it gives to our community.

The cost of running the old school will far outweigh the life cycle costs of building a new one.

5 Feb 2010 | 8:19:05

j freelander says

Ryan Crombie, it's good to hear the comments from young people especially 6th year students. But with out the financial back up his argument does not hold water.
1. The school will need to be replaced in the near future say 5 to 7 years.
2. The school does require lots of TLC, major costs and the extra cost for disruption.
3. This work will go on for some time may be years.
4. When all the costs are taken into account it may be more expensive to build a new school now, but it will be cheaper in the long run.

By the way you are right that money is required to improve the Kilbirnie main street, why don't you and your friends start a petition to the NAC for money to improve the main street.
And can you tell me what is being done about the litter louts at the school that litter the town at lunch time, this is not your problem, but do you know is the school doing anything about it.
Nice to see young people getting involved.

5 Feb 2010 | 9:13:12

dan theman says

All the staff agree with you? That'll be the day, they never agree on anything.
The rumour is that the Scottish Futures Trust has no money for schools and everything is going to pay for another Forth Bridge.
At a local meeting the councillor claimed it is expected the school will be built in 2014 and that the money spent on lifts and windows was less than £800K, and will be used for at least 5 years. He also said that no site has been chosen for a new school yet.

7 Feb 2010 | 4:14:58

Joan Perry says

There is a Garnock Valley Planning Forum being held at Bridgend Community Centre on the 25th of this month from 4.30pm to 6.30pm to discuss the local development of the Garnock Valley over the next 20 years. If you want to have your say and hear what what others want and think book a place by phoning 01294 225125; emailing ldp@north-ayrshire.gov.uk or writing to Development Plans, North Ayrshire Council.
We have to keep telling the powers that be what we want and expect to happen in the area we live in if we don't we can't complain when we get nothing. We had quite a good few responses to the questionnaire we put out at the end of last year and as many as possible of the Town Centre Management Initiative as possible will be there with your answers. Hope you'll be there as well!

8 Feb 2010 | 9:22:23

jeeni bee says

I'm with you Ryan, it's a reflection of our wasteful culture that no-one has a problem with 'chucking away' a 25 year old building and just building a new one. Stewardship, maintenance, and thrift are out of fashon side effects of a consumer society that hasnt quite worked out that resources are finite. There are plenty employment opportunites and skills involved in cyclical maintenance and stewardship- but it's just easier to rip it down and start again. Over and over again the investment is in buildings, not in people.

9 Feb 2010 | 8:02:25

Derek Clarkson says

Most buildings only have a 25 year design life in the first place.

9 Feb 2010 | 8:54:43

Happy Bunny says

Well done Ryan, your post gives me hope that in the future we may have some people who think before spending our money.
I agree with j freelander with regards to the litter, I watched school kids leave the various "take aways" drop their litter while behind them came a council employee picking it up!!!! Also the beautiful Moorpark Road outside the school gates is just awful with discarded cigarette packets, takeaway cartons etc. Am I mistaken or is it against the law to just drop litter!!!!
Ryan pleeeeeze get something going with your fellow pupils regarding litter education, we are all concerned about our wee town centre and it's costing us a man's wages to clean up after them.

9 Feb 2010 | 11:20:13

Derek Clarkson says

Well done Ryan, your post gives me hope that in the future we may have some people who think before spending our money.

++++++++

The new school will be cheaper than the ongoing maintenance and energy costs associated with such an old building.

It will also provide our children with a much better learning environment.

It is a bit of a "no brainer" all round actually.

9 Feb 2010 | 10:27:44

jeeni bee says

My hoose was built in 1735, which according to this argument would mean about 12 rebuilds by now.

I'm not getting how a new building equates to a better learning environment - St Columbus in Kimacolm is in an ancient building yet is one of the top rated schools in Scotland.

Could Derek please explain how a rebuild means a better education, I would be genuinely interested to see how the two are linked.

Thanks

10 Feb 2010 | 10:30:28

Martin Linda says

Hi Ryan, It's Linda.

10 Feb 2010 | 5:52:19

Derek Clarkson says

I'm not getting how a new building equates to a better learning environment - St Columbus in Kimacolm is in an ancient building yet is one of the top rated schools in Scotland.

Could Derek please explain how a rebuild means a better education, I would be genuinely interested to see how the two are linked.

++++++++++

A garden shed would be a better learning environment than Garnock Academy, I assume you never went?

I never said it was a better education though, just a better environment to be educated in.

It is not only easier to rip down and start again, it is cheaper as well!

If we allow the tree huggers and nimbyist to dictate policy we will never innovate and move forward!

11 Feb 2010 | 12:13:10

Ryan Crombie says

The question is Derek, how long has it been since you went? The school is a lot more modern now than it was. If any of you are in doubt and think Ryan is lying about how much it cost to do all this work on the school, all you need to do is go to Garnocks website: http://www.GarnockAcademy.org
Go to 'Photos and Archive' and under the 'Parents Newsletter' heading it has all the parents newsletters that date as far back as 1998. Some of the newsletters contain information about building works and how much it cost. Here is a quote taken from one of these newsletters dated March 2004.

There is good progress being made on the new Astra turf pitch, new Computer room and Window replacement in T-block. In addition we have been informed that £100000 will be spent on upgrading toilet provision next session, and £70000 on upgrading Science laboratories. These are really welcome alterations.

11 Feb 2010 | 5:45:32

Daken Gibri says

That adds up to £170k over 10 years. I note that Ryan is worried about tax payers money now he is leaving school, I'm alright Jack, would sum it up best.

11 Feb 2010 | 7:03:51

Janet Smith says

Has everyone forgotten about Radio City? It's a very old building and if what some of you are saying is true why did they bother to renovate it if a new building would be more energy efficient and cheaper to run? I'm sure you will all agree that restoring the Radio City was successful, the same thing could be achieved with Garnock Academy!

11 Feb 2010 | 7:11:29

Janet Smith says

Also what you were saying about 170K in 10 years. The figures are actually much more because 170k was just for toilets and science labs. There have been new kitchens put in all home economics classrooms and all technical classrooms have been updated to a high standard (a better standard than St Mathews Academy in fact). Also I see someone wrote a comment about the work on the lifts amounting to 800k I can confirm that it was actually 800k per floor for the windows.

11 Feb 2010 | 10:12:47

jeeni bee says

I did go to Garnock, it's similar to schools up and down the country..............can't innovation and technology be applied to sustainability? Perceived obsolescence is designed to persuade the masses to contribute to consumerism - end not mend - it's wasteful and unnecessary all our resources are FINITE - it's not tree hugging - it's a fact unfortunately.

11 Feb 2010 | 11:24:27

Derek Clarkson says

Ryan,

I am not saying anyone is lying, perhaps like Jeenie you'd rather put words into peoples mouths?

Janet,

Radio City was a listed building, compare apples with apples and leave the pears to fight it out with the strawberries!

Any idea how much Radio City cost and the issues it took to develop it?

Perhaps Ryan or the nimbyist and tree hungers could provide some FACTS as to how the existing decrepit Garnock Acadamy is more cost efficient thatn a new one? Perhaps not??

12 Feb 2010 | 8:52:54

dan theman says

Janet Smith can confirm? That's not proof, are we just to take your word for it some evidence might be confirmation, not more fantasy.

12 Feb 2010 | 11:11:33

Derek Clarkson says

it's wasteful and unnecessary all our resources are FINITE - it's not tree hugging - it's a fact unfortunately.

++++++++

Which is exactly WHY a new school is being built, to save on the energy wastage involved in running a 1970's building!

12 Feb 2010 | 1:36:26

Janet Smith says

I have severall other pictures of the school from the inside

12 Feb 2010 | 2:00:40

Derek Clarkson says

They look like the toilets of an Asda or Tesco's, no wonder they are pulling the building down!

12 Feb 2010 | 2:39:24

Derek Clarkson says

I can confirm that it was actually 800k per floor for the windows.

++++++

£800k per floor over 12 floors equates to nearly £10m for windaes!

I dont believe these figures one iota but they do show the total waste of money that is being spent trying to bring a 1970's public building into the modern age.

Raze it to the ground and plant some trees in its place to satisfy the eco warriors!

12 Feb 2010 | 6:43:12

jeeni bee says

Sigh - I'm a bit confused Derek, are you saying that there is no way the building can be brought up to a standard that is equivilant to modern energy efficiencies - and it would use less resources to build a new one to those standards. Do you have evidence of this that we can all refer to, what is your understanding based on? Perhaps you could add some facts to the debate rather than dismiss the contributions of other people.
Are you taking into account the lorry movements through the town, and to local landfill sites, the infrastructure changes that would be required, and the resources that that would need?

Also, are you saying a new building = better learning environment = better education?

13 Feb 2010 | 1:27:25

Derek Clarkson says

Sigh - I'm a bit confused Derek, are you saying that there is no way the building can be brought up to a standard that is equivilant to modern energy efficiencies - and it would use less resources to build a new one to those standards. Do you have evidence of this that we can all refer to, what is your understanding based on?

+++++++

Sigh - it would appear that you are easily confused then, that is not what I am saying as you can do anything in construction with an unlimited pot of cash and a stick of dynamite - do NAC have unlimited funds?

What I am saying is that in this instance it will be of better value, in the long run, to knock the building down and construct a more energy efficient and code compliant new one.

My understanding is based on my knowledge gained from being a construction professional with 25 years experience, what is your understanding based on - hugging a couple of trees and recycling the odd milk carton?

I have recently completed a £25m retail project that entailed knocking down an existing 40,000 sq ft supermarket and building a new 40,000 sq ft supermarket in the same place. This was done due to the energy wastage of the old building and the maintenance and refurbishment costs it would take to run the old store - my client is not in the business of spending £25m unless they get pay back on sums invested! 95% of the waste generated from the old store was recycled with only 5% going to landfill which as you will know cuts down on the burden of landfill tax.

There will of course also be Section 75 enhancements to the village which will aid the infrastructure and overall environment, but I am sure you will have considered this as well?

And for the avoidance of doubt, and to alleviate your continued confusion, I am not saying a new building = a better education or that a better learning environment = better education - there is of course the human factors such as quality of teaching. Its not like you to put words into peoples moths though is it!

What I am saying is that the new school will undoubtedly provide a better learning environment.

Now, perhaps you could provide some facts which will back up your misplaced eco driven theory that retaining the old building will be better value, and will be a better use of resources?

13 Feb 2010 | 1:45:16

Janet Smith says

Sorry I apologise, up there I said it was 800k per floor for windows, I meant to say 80k per floor. Also I would like to point out a fact that Garnock Academy has the highest achieving computing and music departments in Scotland, That is a fact. The principal teacher of computing was awarded an MBE for his services to education and it is his books that he personally designed and published get used to teach pupils in Scotland. So for any of you to say that a new building = better education is talking complete rubbish.

13 Feb 2010 | 3:10:46

Janet Smith says

I'm not against a new school, yes I would admit that a new it would definatly provide better learning environments for children to be in. But what I think my argument and Ryans argument was in the first place is the fact that the council has spent money modernising a school to just demolish it. Nobody complained about having inefficient windows in the school from 1972-2008 so I dont see how another 5 or 6 years would have made much diffirence. What Im trying to say here is, if they knew the school was going to need re-built soon, why did they bother to spend all this money on it. hence why Ryan wrote 'a complete waste of tax payers money'. They have put lifts in the school for the benefit of one pupil thats in a wheel chair but can actually still walk. All this money that has been wasted on the building would have probrably payed for a new police station. I mean the council has just put new flooring and heating into several places in the school. Also they announced that they are replacing all the lights with energy efficient ones. Again a waste of more of our money.

13 Feb 2010 | 11:28:52

Derek Clarkson says

The principal teacher of computing was awarded an MBE for his services to education and it is his books that he personally designed and published get used to teach pupils in Scotland. So for any of you to say that a new building = better education is talking complete rubbish.

+++++++

This is like groundhog day!

No-one, certainly not myself, is saying a new building = better education.

In fact, it is only yourself and jeenie bee who have mentioned this!

There is a little bit of a difference between £800k and £80k, but hey it makes the tree huggers argument stack up a little bit more!. This is not about spending money "modernising" a school, this is about making a school code compliant, economically viable and energy efficient.

The lift, I presume, would have made the school DDA compliant to ensure disabled pupils, teachers and visitors had the same access rights as anyone else.

Here's hoping that you are never that "one" pupil in this "all inclusive" society we live in!

DDA regulations and other new codes of practice, acts of parliament and other legislation would have led to the powers that be make the decision they have done, i.e that the old school is non sustainable.

No-one would have complained in 1972 for the simple fact that the current legislation was not around then!!!

If there has been a waste of tax payers money it has been in spending the money in a building that was not up to current standards, not in building a new one.

Why is the replacement of lights with energy efficient ones a waste of money, are you aware of current legislation in this field?

15 Feb 2010 | 9:08:22

Roger Griffith says

Has anyone considered speaking to pupils and staff from 'new build' schools?

A chronic lack of parking, small rooms, no main staffroom, poor maintenance, lack of ventilation, etc., etc.

This reflects the experience of many with PPPs.

What say you?

16 Feb 2010 | 8:34:02

Derek Clarkson says

I don't know if anyone has considered speaking to staff and pupils from new build schools but would imagine that feedback from others would be part of the process.

The issues you mention could arise quite easily from older schools as well as new ones.

I say you don't just abandon plans to move into the 21st century just because some other school "may" be experiencing issues.

16 Feb 2010 | 10:07:57

Happy Bunny says

Why do people like Derek Clarkson need to be so derisory in the way they reply to people who post an opinion??
Derek you may have some valid points but the rest of us have too!!!

16 Feb 2010 | 1:02:46

M B says

Well done Ryan; your arguments are very well presented.

I have experience working on a number of new and refurbished school projects from Client Consultation and the Design & Construction approach. And, although you have presented a number of very valid points for your justification; this is sometimes and unfortunately superseded due to a number of other factors; such as preliminary feasibility studies (i.e. current construction materials used within the existing Garnock Academy), environmental, sustainability, topographical, demographics, future Council Plans, unknown agendas within Education, relocation of existing Pupils whilst works are ongoing, and future Government Budgets, etc.

Like you; I believe you can sometimes refurbish an existing schools; however, and regrettably the above factors can outweigh these decisions.

Best of Luck
M

16 Feb 2010 | 3:31:25

Derek Clarkson says

Why do people like Derek Clarkson need to be so derisory in the way they reply to people who post an opinion??
Derek you may have some valid points but the rest of us have too!!!

+++++++

Perhaps it has something to do with starting a reply to me with, "sigh" and then continually putting words in my mouth.

Or perhaps it has something to do with others looking for facts when they are not presenting facts themselves.

Or it could perhaps do with people basing their opinions on other unknown agendas whilst not trying to understand any other factors.

Nonetheless, I would only be derisory to those who have been derisory to myself!

17 Feb 2010 | 7:34:25

Irvin Clifford says

At the Community Council meeting on Monday 15th Feb, myself and all present were informed that as yet the council has not decided which of the proposed 10 sites for Garnock Academy will make it onto the final shortlist of 4 proposed sites from which the final site will be chosen.
So refurbish or new build who knows????

17 Feb 2010 | 8:59:20

Derek Clarkson says

Any info on the 10 sites Irvin?

19 Feb 2010 | 9:53:34

Irvin Clifford says

Hey Derek, sadly as usual NAC are being cagey as usual, Anthea Dickson told us that the various NAC councillors have been told that there are up to 10 sites being considered for Garnock Academy, but that they will not be told the sites until NAC chooses the shortlisted 4 sites, which is when the councillors will be told, until then no one seems to know, so sadly Derek no further forward.

19 Feb 2010 | 4:57:09

Billy Long says

As someone from Dalry who went to Garnock Academy in Kilbirnie in the early 80's from 1980 - 1984, I must admit that the contributions raised by everyone on this page about this debate have all raised very good points about the school.

I think it is brilliant to have someone as young as Ryan on board a six year pupil worried about the amount spent on renovating the school to meet the high standards its has to apply to comply with current needs and policy. Yes Kilbirnie needs regeneration and a new police station but also the whole of the Garnock Valley needs a proper police station required to do everything its needs for it to function properly as a law enforcement organisation. But those come out of different budgets so let's not confuse matters. The new school will of course come out of the education budget. The council would not be throwing away good money in the first place on a new school if it was not needed in the first place especially if Libraries and Community Centres are going to be forced to close down due to lack of finance.

Please correct me if I am wrong, was the school not actually sinking at one point and that the P.E department had asbestos in its roof at one time. The school was opened in 1972 and it was relatively new when I went to school and it was crumbling down then and to me the old Victorian buildings of Dalry Primary School were in much better form.

Saying that I have even heard that Garnock Academy has had numerous improvements to it on bringing the buildings up to standard and the education has improved slightly.

When I was at Garnock it was not a good school and I hated it. Not only did the buildings crumble, the standard of education I had received there was poor. Unless you came from a middle class background and your parents where really something like a bank manager (where your were taken by the hand) you were encouraged to learn. If you were a nobody from a council estate with both your parents unemployed then you were rejected by your teachers and had to make do with what was available to you then.

I still notice that yet when you still see some school leavers from working class or underclass backgrounds leaving school with no hope and the middle classes going onto University. Having to come from a middle class family has its benefits. I agree that a new school can make a difference to a child's education (no matter what background), with better new modern fully equipped classrooms and facilities. Ask the Dalry Primary School kids how much they love going to their lovely new school environment that absenteeism is down and they are learning more. I also agree that an existing school can be totally revamped and become a better education facility but it also depends on the teachers of the day. However it would be a major disruption to children of Garnock Academy if the current school was upgraded while the children were at school so it would be far much easier to have a brand new school with better energy savings and it would enhance the environment much better.

The improvements at Garnock Academy in higher building standards and the standard of education for the likes of me have come a bit too late. However it would be nice to know that my old school will be replaced with a much better one and that all pupils and not a selected few receive a far superior education than the one I got and the building will last a bit more longer than 25 years like 100 years from now before it would be needing replaced. I have to admit I have learnt more in life away from school by going to college, using resources in public libraries or TV or the internet than I did at Garnock Academy because I am no longer in contact with the bampots who were in my classes since the day I left!!!!

20 Feb 2010 | 3:26:50

Roger Griffith says

What will the life expectancy of a new school be? It would be fair to state that many PPP projects have had problems - some consultation with Teacher's professional bodies would be beneficial. Funny thing democracy. Ten sites being considered for the new school - why is it a secret?

23 Feb 2010 | 11:12:58

Derek Clarkson says

The life expectancy depends entirely on the money spent.

25 years is the general design life of a new building, this means that if the building is properly maintained it will last 25 years until a refurbishment is required.

Have your say...

Add your own comment

Add

You need to be logged in to add news & pictures. If you haven't already, it's quick & easy to Sign up.

Sorry, there were some problems with your request

Please check that the email address you are using is the same one that you signed up with. If you have forgotten your password we can send you a reminder.

Sign In
  4. Forgotten Password?

Sorry, there were some problems with your request

Please check that the email address you are using is the same one that you signed up with.

Password reminder

  1. Type the email address that you signed up with below and we’ll send your password to you.

  4. <<Return to Login

Your password has been sent to email

Please check your email account.

<<Return to Login

Contribute

  1. By posting on s1kilbirnie you’re agreeing to abide by our Posting Policy. Your email address won’t be displayed to the public.

  1. Here's your chance to make sure your contribution is exactly as you'd like it.

  3. Your photo will be uploaded when you click 'Send it'

    >Your photo will be uploaded when you click 'Send it'

    Your photo and Video will be uploaded when you click 'Send it'

  4. By clicking 'send it' you’re agreeing to abide by our Posting Policy.

Tell everyone your news

If it’s topical in Kilbirnie, this is the place for it.

Remember that news doesn't just mean crime and politics – a golden wedding, a new baby, or a personal achievement are news to any community.

Add

You need to be logged in to add news & pictures. If you haven't already, it's quick & easy to Sign up.

Sorry, there were some problems with your request

Please check that the email address you are using is the same one that you signed up with. If you have forgotten your password we can send you a reminder.

Sign In
  4. Forgotten Password?

Sorry, there were some problems with your request

Please check that the email address you are using is the same one that you signed up with.

Password reminder

  1. Type the email address that you signed up with below and we’ll send your password to you.

  4. <<Return to Login

Your password has been sent to email

Please check your email account.

<<Return to Login

Contribute

  1. Please make sure what you’re adding is news. If it's an event, you must also add it to our What's On section before it'll be allowed here. History and advertising have their own sections, too.

    Posting Tips

  4. If your contribution is about a specific location, please enter the nearest postcode (if known)

  1. Here's your chance to make sure your contribution is exactly as you'd like it.

  3. Your photo will be uploaded when you click 'Send it'

    >Your photo will be uploaded when you click 'Send it'

    Your photo and Video will be uploaded when you click 'Send it'

  4. By clicking 'send it' you’re agreeing to abide by our Posting Policy.

In the News