Response from Zac

I have had a further response from Zac Goldsmith, after my second letter. It is fairly short but he has taken up inquiries. I have further replied to him - both notes are below.

Dear Richard,
Without knowing all the details, and before the key decisions have even been made, clearly I won’t be opposing anything. However I have asked the Council and the Education spokesman to provide more information.

Yours sincerely,
Zac Goldsmith

Dear Zac

Thank you for coming back to me. I would appreciate any other observations you are able to make once you have received more information.

There seems abject confusion over all this. For example, I have been told, in writing, that no land will be sold to fund stage one of the development (rebuilding SEN provison at The Russell School) and that it will funded by Council Reserves. Yet the consultation document on the Richmond Website on which parents have been asked to comment clearly states:

"The cost of the rebuild would be met by funding from the Council with addition contributions from the sale of the redundant site".
and also
"Through the sale of the current Strathmore site and demolition of the current buildings, we would be able to release significant funds"
With these conflicting pieces of information, it is little wonder that parents are confused and angry.
I would also be interested in your views on the consultation document (http://www.richmond.gov.uk/sen_consultation_secondary_june_2012.pdf) . Are you supportive or opposed to the sale of Strathmore school land as the document suggests? I appreciate you do not wish to comment on unwritten proposals but this document is there so interested parties can do exactly that.
Yours sincerely