Jersey mother worried about plans for new town school – BBC

Report on the St Helier Primary School Consolidation Project and its Alignment with Sustainable Development Goals

1.0 Introduction

This report analyses the proposed consolidation of three primary schools in St Helier, Jersey, into a new, single educational facility at Gas Place. The project, which involves replacing La Passerelle, St Luke’s, and Springfield primary schools, is examined through the framework of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). It highlights a significant conflict between the government’s objectives for educational infrastructure and stakeholder concerns regarding child welfare, community space, and participatory governance.

2.0 Project Analysis in the Context of SDGs

2.1 Government Rationale: Advancing SDG 4 (Quality Education) and SDG 9 (Infrastructure)

The government’s primary justification for the new school is to advance SDG 4 by providing quality, inclusive, and equitable education. The project directly addresses key targets:

• SDG Target 4.a: The plan aims to build and upgrade education facilities to create effective learning environments. The Minister for Education and Lifelong Learning, Deputy Rob Ward, has stated that the current school buildings are inadequate, citing issues such as insufficient space and poor resilience to weather conditions.
• SDG 9 (Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure): The construction of a modern, purpose-built school represents an investment in resilient infrastructure, intended to provide long-term, high-quality services for the community.

2.2 Stakeholder Opposition: Conflicting Development Priorities

Significant opposition from parents and community groups highlights tensions with other critical SDGs.

1. Parental Concerns Regarding SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-being) and SDG 4 (Quality Education): Parents have expressed apprehension that the move to a larger school will negatively impact their children’s well-being and educational outcomes. Key concerns include:
   • A potential decline in student confidence and mental health (SDG 3).
   • A reduction in personalised attention, which could compromise the inclusivity and quality of education (SDG 4).
   • Disruption to students who thrive in smaller, more supportive environments.
2. Community Campaign for SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities): A vocal campaign advocates for the Gas Place site to be used as an extension of the adjacent Millennium Park. This position aligns with:
   • SDG Target 11.7: The call to provide universal access to safe, inclusive, and accessible green and public spaces, which are vital for community well-being in urban areas.
   • Campaigners argue that developing the site as a park with community facilities would offer broader benefits to the entire town population.

3.0 Governance and Decision-Making

3.1 Challenges to SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions)

The implementation of the project has raised questions about the effectiveness and inclusivity of the decision-making process, a core component of SDG 16.

• SDG Target 16.7: This target calls for ensuring responsive, inclusive, participatory, and representative decision-making. Both parents and community campaigners have stated that they feel their views have not been adequately considered by politicians.
• Reports indicate that communications from stakeholders to the minister have not been answered, suggesting a breakdown in responsive governance.
• While the Minister has denied these claims and invited parents to engage, the perception of a non-participatory process persists, undermining public trust in institutional processes.

4.0 Conclusion and Recommendations

The St Helier school consolidation project exemplifies the challenge of balancing multiple, sometimes competing, Sustainable Development Goals. While the government’s initiative is rooted in the important objective of improving educational infrastructure (SDG 4, SDG 9), it faces legitimate opposition based on concerns for well-being (SDG 3), sustainable urban planning (SDG 11), and inclusive governance (SDG 16). To ensure a truly sustainable outcome, a more integrated approach is required.

Recommendations:

1. Conduct a holistic impact assessment that evaluates the project against a broad range of SDGs, including health, community, and governance indicators, not just educational infrastructure.
2. Establish a formal, multi-stakeholder dialogue platform to ensure the principles of SDG 16.7 are met, allowing for meaningful participation from parents, community groups, and educators.
3. Re-evaluate alternative sites and development plans that could potentially satisfy the need for both modern educational facilities and the preservation of vital urban green space, thereby achieving a more balanced and widely supported outcome.

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

• SDG 4: Quality Education

  The article’s central theme is the plan to replace three primary schools with a new one. It discusses the quality of the educational environment, with a parent expressing concern that her “child’s education will suffer” in a larger school. The government’s goal is to “improve the town’s schools” by building “purpose-built facilities,” directly addressing the quality of educational infrastructure.

• SDG 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities

  The debate over the use of the Gas Place site, either for a school or an “extension of nearby Millennium Park,” connects directly to urban planning and community resources. Campaigners argue that “Green space is so important to town dwellers” and suggest the site could be used for a “community centre, youth club, creche facilities,” highlighting the need for sustainable and inclusive community spaces.

• SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being

  The article touches upon the mental well-being of students. A parent describes how her daughter’s “confidence went so down and she was always upset” in a larger school, but after moving to a smaller one, she is “eager to get to school every day.” This illustrates the link between the learning environment and a child’s mental health.

• SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

  The conflict between the government, parents, and community campaigners raises issues of governance and public participation. The parent’s feeling that “parents’ views were not being considered by politicians” and the fact that some parents “have yet to receive a reply” from the minister point to challenges in ensuring responsive and inclusive decision-making processes.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

• Under SDG 4 (Quality Education):

  • Target 4.a: Build and upgrade education facilities that are child, disability and gender sensitive and provide safe, non-violent, inclusive and effective learning environments for all. This target is directly relevant as the Minister for Education states the current school buildings “are too small,” “don’t meet standard requirements,” are “falling down,” and are “too hot in the summer.” The plan is to “build purpose-built facilities” to create a better learning environment.

• Under SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities):

  • Target 11.7: By 2030, provide universal access to safe, inclusive and accessible, green and public spaces… This is the central argument of the Millennium Town Park Support Group, which is campaigning for an “extension to the park” instead of a school, emphasizing that “Green space is so important to town dwellers.”

• Under SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-being):

  • Target 3.4: …promote mental health and well-being. The article connects to this target through the parent’s account of her daughter’s emotional state. The negative impact of the previous school (“confidence went so down”) and the positive impact of the current one (“eager to get to school”) highlight the importance of the educational environment on a child’s mental well-being.

• Under SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions):

  • Target 16.7: Ensure responsive, inclusive, participatory and representative decision-making at all levels. This target is highlighted by the conflict itself. Parents feel their “views were not being considered,” and campaigners protest what they perceive as a lack of consultation (“‘Politicians not listening’ over new school plans”). The minister’s denial and invitation for parents to contact him are part of this ongoing decision-making process.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

• For Target 4.a (Build and upgrade education facilities):

  • Implied Indicator: The physical condition and suitability of school buildings. The article provides a baseline by describing the current schools as failing to “meet standard requirements,” being “too small,” and “falling down.” Progress would be measured by the successful construction of the new “purpose-built facilities” that are safe and adequate for learning.

• For Target 3.4 (Promote mental health and well-being):

  • Implied Indicator: Student attendance and engagement. The article implies this through the parent’s testimony. Her daughter’s improved attendance (“her attendance has improved”) and positive attitude towards school (“she’s eager to get to school every day”) serve as qualitative indicators of a healthy and supportive learning environment that promotes well-being.

• For Target 11.7 (Provide access to green and public spaces):

  • Implied Indicator: The amount of accessible public green space in urban areas. The campaigners’ protest and banners with slogans like “More Green Space Needed” directly point to this as a measurable outcome. The decision on whether the Gas Place site becomes a school or a park extension will directly affect this indicator for the community.

• For Target 16.7 (Ensure responsive decision-making):

  • Implied Indicator: Level of public consultation and satisfaction with government responsiveness. The article implies this can be measured by tracking interactions between citizens and officials. The report that parents “have contacted the minister via email and have yet to receive a reply” and the general feeling that “parents’ views were not being considered” are negative indicators of this process.

4. SDGs, Targets, and Indicators Table

Source: bbc.co.uk