Ombudsman on school case

Press, 15 October 1976, Page 1

Ombudsman on school case

Aggrieved parents living within 40 miles of Darfield have taken their case against the proposed enlargement of Darfield High School to the Ombudsman in Christchurch (Mr G. R. Laking). They say the Ombudsman has agreed that the matter falls within his jurisdiction. His senior investigating officer in Christchurch (Mr A. J. Curry) is already engaged on it.

Mr Curry said yesterday that he was not free under the Ombudsmen Act 1975 to discuss the matter, but that the complainants were. The couple who lodged the complaint, Mr and Mrs L. W. Craigie, said yesterday that they had approached the Ombudsman in Christchurch ' two months ago. He told them

that he would begin his main investigation after the Minister of Education (Mr Gandar) had received the deputation in September from protesting parents and made his final decision on the school’s future status.

If the Minister ratified his earlier decision that the Darfield High School would be extended to take Form I and II pupils from district primary schools, the Ombudsman would have to establish whether the Minister had been misinformed or not told enough, Mrs Craigie said. Parents in the area said that the Minister did not appreciate the feeling against regarding the school from a Form 111 to VII to a Form I to VII, nor the "invalidity” of the ballot taken in 1971 by the Canterbury Education Board. Since the discovery of

"information not made known to them” at special meetings held by the board in 1971 parents said the vote on the enlarged school has swung dramatically from mostly for to 77 per cent against at meetings held by contributing schools three months ago. To another special meeting soon of the area’s combined school committee, they have included Mr Gandar, the Minister of Social Welfare (Mr Walker) — because they say the issue has now become one affecting the community and the welfare of children — and Mr Curry. A spokesman for Hororata parents, Mr A. Thome, said that the Education Department was using as “bluff” information that SIM had already been spent on the school and that to reverse the regrad-

ing policy now would be too costly. The money had been spent on facilities the school would need whether it was regraded or not, he said. It had not mentioned that buildings had had to be replaced because of a fire at the school several years ago.

Voting procedure at the 1971 meetings had not been consistent: one area meeting voted by individuals, the other by households. One meeting had been declared unanimously for regrading, but the vote had not been unanimous, he said.

Glenroy and Windwhistle schools had given a conditional vote in 1971 — in favour if the education board provided satisfactory transport. The board had failed to do so, Mr Thome said.