SIR - In response of the 'blazing row' item in the Keighley News and T&A this week, being a parent of a child remaining at Bronte School, I would like to air my views.

I personally voted for the use of sweatshirts along with the majority, obviously 'a waste of time'. I have three children, two already at Oakbank School, with sweatshirts that could be re-used as many other parents do. I budget very carefully and like to shop around and have the 'freedom of choice', this option appears to have been taken away.

A certain minority have decided to monopolise the situation. Do you have the parents down as some kind of 'pond life'? As a parent I refuse to go along with collaborated choice, I ask you, what are your intended actions if we, 'point blank', refuse to go along with your game plan?

I would like to bring your attention to a typical annual agenda of my son's blazer. One bought and one 'hand-me-down', sleeve torn off on numerous occasions, pockets ripped, splattered in mud from school field, frequent washing, surely my son's blazer will not remain the same shade of black.

As for the badge, thank you for saving me the chore of having to mobilise my sewing box, only to discover a further cost of having to purchase and sew on a 'house badge'.

I am very disappointed in the outcome of this issue, along with many other parents I have spoken to, but who cares? We're only the paying parents.

Could you please give me some direction as to where I should purchase my son's shirt and trousers from, I would perish the thought of getting the wrong shade.

MRS M HAWLEY,

Exley Road, Keighley.

SIR - After reading the article in the Keighley News (30/6/00) concerning the new Bronte school uniform single supplier, I was appaled at the idea that someone could be upset by such a decision.

As a former Bingley Grammar School student I wore exactly the same blazer (with a sown on badge) as every other boy in the lower school for three years.

This caused no problems to parents of the children attending Bingley Grammar, even though the Bingley Grammar blazer when I attended was £75. There are only two suppliers of the Bingley blazer.

It is a good idea to have only one supplier as it keeps all pupils at the same level rather than some children with wealthy parents having expensive blazers, while the less well off have lower quality. It cuts down on elitism in schools and makes all students look smart.

£30 is not a lot of money to spend on a blazer when it should last up to three years with good care.

CHRIS SUGDEN, (Age 18),

Bradford Road, Riddlesden.

SIR - Following your front page article on the Oakbank blazer row: I have two children starting Oakbank in September, one from Bronte and one from Worth Valley.

It is because of this I started thinking of uniform back in March. I had the chance to buy two blazers in the sales that cost £12.50 each.

I checked the Oakbank prospectus (that was unclear) before buying.

It states 'A blazer with the Oakbank badge' that does not say whether to sew on or already sewn in. I rang the school who said the governors were still deciding which way to have it. I even checked with 'Firths' who at that point had no blazers in but had sewn in ones on order. I decided to write to the governors asking them to reconsider the blazer. I got no reply.

Meanwhile I know of some parents who have bought plain black blazers as they did not know about the badge. This has arisen because the original September 99 prospectus does not actually state 'Firths' as the sole supplier.

It has taken three months for this decision and for a letter to be distributed to parents that at the end of June is far too late.

The letter also quotes ' a new blazer will be fair to all, ie same expense'.

However not everyone is on the same income, some on Family Credit may get help with uniform costs and many have two or more children going to the school through the reorganisation. How can this be fair?

It does not stop there. The PE kit and the jumper are embossed with the Oakbank crescent.

The minimum cost of all embossed clothes is around £64 with a further £15 for other garments.

The cost does not include shirts etc for uniform being washed or shoes, raincoat, bag and school equipment.

I do not think the governors have acted in the best interest of most parents. The uniform should have been clearer on the prospectus and not 10 weeks before the start of the school year.

If they had made the decision quicker, it would have been easier to reverse. Now Firths have got them in stock nothing can be done, especially when 900 blazers are at stake. Finally if the original ballot of parents went with the sweatshirt, why were we ignored? So much for parental choice!

MRS D WRIGHT,

Oakworth.

SIR - I would like to congratulate Mr Roberts and his team at Oakbank for yet again shooting themselves in the foot for their appalling decision regarding the implementation of the school uniform.

The cavalier attitude towards the wishes of a group of new parents is amazing considering the bad press the school has courted over the last year.

You would have thought that the head and his board of governors would be endeavouring to build bridges with the people who have decided to send their children to the school whether it be at the Exley head site or the old Bronte school. Oakbank have decided to phase in their children to the main site of the school so why can't they phase in the new blazers giving parents the financial choice for a set period.

This coming September is a time of concern to parents who are sending their children to a school which has a team of teachers who themselves are new to Oakbank.

To therefore demand this compulsory purchase of a blazer from a school sponsor (from his shiny new shop) begs the question which comes first, the money or the new intake of our children?

I feel that the school's arrogant and insensitive stance with this issue has cast many doubts in the parents minds in the decision in sending their children to Oakbank.

Therefore I feel commonsense should prevail and Mr Roberts and his board of governors should reconsider this decision.

NAME AND ADDRESS

SUPPLIED.

SIR - In the film 'It's A Wonderful Life', James Stewart returns to Bedford Falls (having been granted his wish not to be born) and finds it renamed Pottersville.

All the town's goods and services have been corrupted by the ruthless, publicity grabbing antics of the embittered, megalomaniac Potter, and the community has suffered badly because of his mis-guided vision.

The Building and Loans is shut down as it is in direct competition to his own bank. Those who have raised voices of dissent have been ignored. Whilst we're at it, in The Simpsons, the character of Montgomery Burns (and his loyal sidekick Smithers) are also based on Potter. Smithers of course being the epitome of all yes men. Have the staff and governors of Oakbank been watching too much television?

Why does it appear that Oakbank has become (for many in Keighley) a law unto itself?

Uniforms exclusively supplied by a sponsor of the school, and a governing body which rides roughshod over the views of its parents! Sports College status revoked, but no real reason given as to why?

A school that seems to single-mindedly court publicity!

Can we please remember that it is not the only school in Keighley. When was the last time you heard such stories emanating from Holy Family or Greenhead.

Two schools which seem to be more committed to providing education to the children of Keighley and working in partnership.

I wouldn't be at all surprised if the wearing of a straw boater or waistcoat becomes compulsory for Oakbank pupils in the near future.

Perhaps the school would also like to boost funds by endorsing particular shops or products as official suppliers to Oakbank School.

As a teacher, I understand how important it is for schools to work in partnership with parents, other schools and the community.

John Roberts appears to have forgotten about the parents and other schools and decided just to work with the community.

Perhaps the parents would like to remind Mr Roberts about the uniform they decided upon by sending their children to school in September wearing it.

After all, schools are run for the benefit of the children, the parents and then the staff. Not the other way round.

ANTONY SILSON,

Carleton Street,

Beechcliffe.