This letter to the Editor has arrived from Chris Whitehouse in response to Cllr David Pugh’s writings published yesterday, which in turn was a response to Chris’ article on the new school transport policy – Ed.
Dear Ventnor Blog,
Yesterday, you published at the request of Cllr David Pugh a statement that I have made a “false claim”. That is a serious and defamatory allegation to which I have no choice but to respond.
The statement to which Cllr Pugh takes exception is a comment on the proposed start date of September 2012 for the new school transport policy. The statement I made reads simply:
“It is unclear whether that [start date] is for students already at the [Christ the King] College, or only for new students in the future.”
Unclear to a lay reader
The Council’s proposed policy document is indeed unclear on that point to me as a lay reader and to every other lay reader with whom I have discussed it, since the paragraph which Cllr Pugh cites as making this clear requires a detailed knowledge of the difference between several different school categories (community, voluntary aided, foundation trusts, or academies).
The paragraph he cites is 123 words long, does not mention Christ the King College by name, or mention “faith” schools at all. It is located in a completely different section (Section 9) of the Policy Paper to the one which actually sets out the new transport proposals for high school travel (Section 6).
Against that background, my comment that this point is “unclear” is a very reasonable and moderate one. For the record, the point has now been separately clarified and I have the assurance of Cllr Pugh that the proposed start date of September 2012 is for new students attending the College not existing pupils. That is progress.
“Vicious personal attacks”
The Leader of the Council must not conduct its business by such vicious personal attacks on the integrity of local residents who have the temerity to oppose his specific proposals on this particular issue, in my case because they are not consistent with the Conservative Policies of choice and diversity in education which I have spent my lifetime promoting in national and local politics; which The Prime Minister, David Cameron, and Education Secretary, Michael Gove, reiterated and reinforced only a few days ago; and because they fail to take into account the particular transport implications of the Island.
Prior to this consultation, I considered Cllr Pugh a personal friend and had a great deal of respect for him; I told him so in writing, but in 30 years of involvement in public service as a Conservative I never before seen such an outburst.
Withdrawal and apology required
Cllr Pugh must withdraw and apologise for his calumny, and I give him now the opportunity to do so.
Chris Whitehouse
Totland Bay
Isle of Wight
UPDATE 13:05: We wrote to David Pugh after we publish this. He replied
I stand by my statement.
Section 3 of the document is clear what the reference to secondary schools means:
Secondary schools (11 – 16 age range) *
community, voluntary aided, trust and academy schools, some of which are called colleges;http://www.iwight.com/council/committees/cabinet/16-8-11/PAPER%20C%20-%20APPENDIX%20B.pdf
I maintain the view that this is clear. Therefore any claim that it is unclear is false, in my view.
I don’t believe that sending a robust response to a high profile campaign amounts to a vicious personal attack, as has been inferred.
Kind regards
David
