The added cost of ending local schools?

By this line of commentary, it would seem that unless the changing flow of pedestrian traffic results on strict adherence to the road/pedestrian principles a school should not be closed ?

V8, go and read the report I linked to above:

http://www.roads.act.gov.au/roads/schoolscrossingsreview

In there you will find this:

Australia in general and the ACT specifically are performing at the better end of the pedestrian road accident
trauma spectrum. The ACT has one of the lowest pedestrian accident rates in the world based on measures of
either population or registered vehicles. One of the key reasons for this achievement is it’s relatively well
planned layout with a strong road hierarchy system. The ACT has a rate that is less than half the Australian
average rate for the number of pedestrians killed per 100,000 population or 10,000 registered vehicles.

In the introductory blurb there is this:

Unlike most other Australian cities, Canberra’s transport system including pedestrian facilities has been
relatively well planned. As a result of this planning the ACT has a four-tiered road system:

• Arterial roads that are generally multi-lane high-speed roads with no frontage development or
direct access that connects towns.

• Major Collector that generally form the spine road within suburbs and often the primary bus
routes within a suburb

• Minor Collector that also form the more important internal road

• Local Roads that provide access to residential blocks, parks, etc.

Combined with this strong road hierarchy is the pedestrian network that provides for pedestrian movement
along and across the more important suburban roads as well as pedestrian underpasses on many collector
roads, community schools and shops. This planning generally minimises conflicts between pedestrians and
motor vehicles – a situation that does not exist in most other Australian cities where schools and shops are
often located on the main streets of cities, towns or villages.

My conclusion? Anything that breaks down this strict road hierarchy, i.e. forcing pedestrians to cross major roads, is going to make the ACT less safe for pedestrians. I honestly can’t see how any other conclusion could be reached.

How unsafe is something I can’t say. The Government should be able to put some numbers on it, but that would be assuming this proposal was well thought out and planned. It is not.

Your tax dollars at work…another quality government outcome.
Jokes aside (?!?!), I still see no concrete link between school closures and child related traffic accidents. As was stated before, the major predictor seems to be population. Also, the statements quoted above:
“The ACT through good planning has lower accident rates than elsewhere in Australia.

• When pedestrian accidents are isolated the superiority of the ACT is further accentuated.

• Australia compares favourably with other countries, with the ACT having a fatal accident lower than the best country in the world, Sweden.

• Elderly people are shown to be particularly vulnerable with fatality rates significantly higher than other groups in the community. ”
are nothing but throwaway lines and pure rubbish. Through good planning? Meaning what exactly? Data, please.
One kid makes a bad decision and a sad outcome occurs, and we are trying to link this statistical data? One event by itself is an anomaly, not an indicator.
I agree that first impressions may be that traveling further makes things more dangerous, but where are the FACTS??

Snahon, there is no premise. Some poor kid gets smacked by a bus and JB says “expect to see more of this if local schools close”.

A statement of the pure bleeding obvious I would have thought.

When you say “no one can guess whether the number of kids who have to currently cross *major* roads walking to/from school is going to increase for those kids who won’t get mum or dad to start driving them start taking buses” you’re dead right. They Government shouldn’t be guessing when it comes to such a wide ranging and potentially disastrous plan. The Government has it in their power, in fact they are by law required to, perform risk assessments associated with the proposal to close 39 schools. They have not done so. I know because I was at the “South East Belconnen” consultation meeting where that question was asked of Dr Michelle Bruniges (ACT Education CEO). She waffled on, but basically admitted they had not been done.

I can tell you though that for my kids in Giralang they have to cross no roads to get to Giralang Primary and Pre schools. None, nada, ZERO . The same is true for many other kids in Giralang. If ANY of these kids decide to walk the 2-3 kms to Kaleen Primary they will have to cross at least one, probably two “major collector roads”, i.e. those with a 60km speed limit.

This “Towards 2020” proposal is shithouse. I have seen some of the documents from the 1988 school closure proposals and they were much much better researched and argued than this. It is a complete rush job. They should start from scratch because they will get a better outcome.

This whole premise surrounds an accident that occured at a major road. The resultant effects of children crossing *major* roads (because I guess those students that walk already cross ‘minor’ roads and may not cross major roads where there are greater number of pedestrians and vehicles) will invariable be dictated by the bus routes their bus(es) takes – so unless someone has the new bus routes that will be the result from school closures, no one can guess whether the number of kids who have to currently cross *major* roads walking to/from school is going to increase for those kids who won’t get mum or dad to start driving them start taking buses.

Also whilst JB *may* have a point about probabilities being significantly increased the net results currently show extremely small numbers. so applying increased probabilities to small numbers still equal small numbers.

All you are doing is shifting kids from walking along one path to walking a different path to get to school. That increased localisation of child pedestrian traffic may result in increases in the number of accidents, it may not – but you can’t attribute school closures as a factor to increases in number of accidents/deaths when those closures haven’t even occured.

JB is on the money.

The more you force kids to interact with traffic the more accidents you will have. A good source of info is here:

http://www.roads.act.gov.au/roads/schoolscrossingsreview

The money quotes are:

• The ACT through good planning has lower accident rates than elsewhere in Australia.

• When pedestrian accidents are isolated the superiority of the ACT is further accentuated.

• Australia compares favourably with other countries, with the ACT having a fatal accident lower than the best country in the world, Sweden.

• Elderly people are shown to be particularly vulnerable with fatality rates significantly higher than other groups in the community.

The overall conclusion to be drawn from this information is that the ACT is a particularly safe place for pedestrians and that it will be very difficult to achieve any significant improvements in pedestrian safety.

Although the average walk to school rate is not high (about 30-40%) there are places that buck that trend.

Giralang (listed to be closed) has the highest walk to school rate in the ACT (60%), currently has two walking school bus routes and has pedestrian underpasses that mean many kids don’t have to cross a road at all. Let alone a major one.

Just because the Towards 2020 plan is unpopular doesn’t mean it must be good. It is bad policy, full stop.

You can still have a democracy without a resorting to a laughable illusion of “community consultation” and an obsession with trying to please all of the people all of the time, JB.

Process is far from irrelevant, but it’s very easy for government to get absorbed by process at the expense of outcome. Process focussed governance is not good governance.

Christ! I sound like a policy paper!

Sadly, a decision like this, whilst a good decision, is not a popular one. Ideally, I’d have liked to see an election called on an issue this substantial. At least you get a yes/no answer after the election, rather than endless sub-committees.

BTW – I can’t see many folk going to the barricades over the closure of a few schools. Well, beyond the odd old lefty with a Red Revolution fantasy…

apples and oranges WMC, apples and oranges.

Democracy Mr Shab,

It’s messy and inefficient but less so than bloody revolution.

I doubt JB’s logic, because it’s not borne out by the evidence.

Every day, squillions of primary school kids travel to school all around the country. Almost all of them reside outside the ACT, and so don’t enjoy our cushy neighbourhood school setup. And yet, in any given year, only a handful are killed as pedestrians across the whole country.

If JB’s logic was sound, we’d expect to see a dramatic increase in casualties in those states where children travel furthest. However, the only predictor of the casualty rate seems to be population; that is, a state with more children appears to have more accidents. Even then, it’s a very weak correlation. Much higher traffic rates, far fewer local schools, greater distances – so why don’t the statistics show tens of times as many fatalities?

It would appear from the data that any time a kid gets whacked on the way to school, it is a rare and freak occurrence, and as such, probably affected by a multitude of factors you cannot measure or predict. To use the two latest examples, what patterns or similarities were there between the Monash and Northbourne Ave collisions? One was a kid walking by himself on a main road. The other was two kids accompanied by their mother on a pedestrian crossing on a side street in a school zone. What could you have learned from one that would have predicted or prevented the other? Nothing. Sometimes kids are just stupid, even outside their front gate, chasing a ball on to the road. And sometimes drivers are stupid, speeding in a school zone, distracted from the road ahead, mowing down most of a family in one go. The distance between their front doors and their school had absolutely nothing to do with what happened to them.

If JB’s theory had any credibility, we’d expect to see (a) a strong correlation between population and fatalities and (b) another multiplier showing that the rest of the states had a rate higher than than that expected by population alone, indicating there was something else at play. Then, and only then, could you begin ruling out other factors to determine whether travelling distance was a relevant consideration. Given that the most populous states like NSW or Victoria only have a couple, or even no, primary school pedestrian fatalities in a year, good luck finding any data to perform your analysis.

I find it interesting that you only “grudgingly concede” a pattern from reports about assaults on two taxi drivers, but you’ll happily form a strong causative link between school closures and child casualty rates based on a sample of one, while totally ignoring another incident the same day that completely contradicts every single aspect of your hypothesis.

Sorry JB – but the articles comes across very anti-school closures, regardless of it’s intent.

Perhaps it’s not fair to equate “government policy” with “Stanhope”, but as Sonic’s hegemony over the government agenda increases, the two are becoming difficult to distinguish 😉

And (as a purely philosophical point) I would disagree that the process is superior to the outcome. IMO outcome being subordinate to process equals stifling bureaucracy. Especially in Canberra, where we can be inclined to forget that the outcome is the raison d’etre of process, and so many in the population are adept at the manipulation of process to stifle change.

Actually I don’t disagree with school closures per se.

I’ve repeatedly said I don’t disagree with the concept.

I disagree with the Government deciding to irrevocably change the way they deliver a core service on the basis of a secret review and then pre-empt consultation by the manner of their announcement.

The process is, in my view, more important than the outcomes.

This story makes no mention of the Chief Minister so it’s sad he’s been dragged into it by people who think a disagreement over policy is a personal attack.

I don’t think anyone is doubting your logic, JB. I’d say you’re guilty of overstating the risks involved and assuming that such risks are immutable.

Given your position on school closures and your record of antipathy to all things Stanhope, it looks a little bit like using a flimsy and only losely related argument to saddle up your personal hobby-horse (there’s another torturous metaphor for you).

miz, I understand where you are coming from. However I’m varly certain (altough I’m certainly no expert on the new –or old– IR laws) that you cannot be dismissed for that sort of thing.

I remember when the unions first started their campaign they had the advert where the mother (who was taking care of her sick child) was told to come into work or be fired. And the government said that would not be allowed under the law.

*Sigh again*

Take above example of danger of sending primary school children long distances to school unaccompanied.

Note comments by police who have some experience in the area:

They very much have tunnel vision and do not have that awareness adults have developed.

Take the 0.999999 probability of a such a trip to and from school being completed safely.

Multiply that chance against itself thousands of times for each child 200 days a year.

Still with me?

See, more chance of this sort of accident, much, much more chance of this sort of accident.

Now I understand that probability is used by advanced logicians.

I’m pretty sure that when VG says “logic” he means “common sense” aka “A bundle of ignorant prejudices”.

In things I never thought I’d say – I’m with VG.

You’re applying the well known media technique of “this horrendous thing has happened – quick, let’s tie it into my bandwagon of choice”, without really thinking about whether your analogy actually applies. Which it doesn’t.

Considering that:
a) This kid was going to school in a different zone due to parental choice, not government action.
b) School closures have been deliberately targeted to avoid students having to cross busy roads
your analogy looks remarkably thin.

Now, you’ve been watching Stanhope long enough to do the angry voice “I am right, everybody else is wrong” very well, but it still looks very silly.

Hey Woody,

How do you get stats on Black spots in the ACT? The last ACT budget said that there will be more speed cameras installed at black spots and along North Bourne Avenue. I wonder if there is any correlation between accidents and the reduced speed limits along Nth Bourne Ave.

LG, I admit the IR link is somewhat tangential to this topic. However since you query my train of thought I will elaborate. I know several (partnered) people who organise their work with one doing the school drop off and the other the pickup. Lucky them. They have been able to negotiate a desirable condition.

As a solo parent I have found that my workplace is not (as you rightly mentioned) very receptive to the occasional late start due to school issues. Sometimes though this is unavoidable, and with schools becoming further away as standard and not in walking distance for many Canberra families, it will be more likely to affect work (missed bus, etc). Under JWH’s IR laws this could be enough reason for getting sacked.

As for Centrelink’s new world order, it means that there will be no choice for sole parents/disability pensioners to be stay-at-home parents (while partnered parents will still have this choice). There goes the accompanied walk to school/bus stop, guided reading, canteen assistance . . . etc.

I hope the lad pulls through OK.

I saw somewhere that the Kambah closures were in part structured around having sufficiuent school places on both sides of Drakeford Drive for porecicesly this reason.

Children have difficulty with distance of oncoming traffic, that’s a fact.

Students don’t give a toss about what else might be on the road, if you do enough bus duties you’d know it.

The fact that this kid lives in Nicholls but goes to an inner north school does highlight one thing – school closures will put greater distances between home and school.

ACTION doesn’t have a contingency plan re: school buses for 2007 because the “consultation” doesn’t finish until Dec 21st. Thus no on knows what’s going to happen anytime soon and we don’t know how many buses will actually cater for those students, it could be all of them or half. If it isn’t all of them, then they have to catch the local bus and could end up crossing roads without supervision.

Others, on the other hand, have difficulty applying logic. I guess that makes us all square

Some confusion has set in here. The proposition is that kids on busses/crossing busy roads are more likely to have accidents, (such as this dreadful accident.) Future school closures will lead to more kids on busses in future, which will leave them more prone to accidents.
Noone has tried to say that future school closures have influenced this particular accident. I’m not sure where that idea came from?

i don’t force you to read it and sadly most people are incapable of applying probability.

What’s become obvious to me, having read the last few pages of comments on this article, is that johnboy is an arrogant ignoramous who isn’t interested in any opinion but his own. Still, it did provide me with a few minutes of entertainment, so its not a total loss.

miz – I think claiming that the new IR laws will make things harder for getting kids to and from school compared to previous arrangements is a long bow to draw

current certified agreements don’t have provisions for ‘i’m running a bit late cause I had to take my kid to school’ that I’m aware of.

Tur, tut JB. You have become rather petty because what to be honest is a baseless assertion, has been exposed for what it is.

My dislike for everything Standope is well documented. However using school closures as a contributor to this child’s terrible predicament is non-sensical.

I does warm my heart, however, to note that I have achieved ‘fame’ in some format.

That’s OK VG, your narrow minded antipathy to new ideas is so famed that it upsets me not at all.

Ridiculous assertion sorry JB.

And resorting to personal jibes, well now we know you’re spent

I agree that more kids will be on buses after the amalgamations.

While a proportion of parents may be able to rearrange their work around school, many can’t. I can’t. (And with new IR laws and stringent penalties for sole parents/disabled I can’t see it getting better). I work in town, and must be on an express bus by a set time myself.

I have allowed my children to walk/ride to their local school from Year 3, as there are no roads to cross. Now there WILL be major roads (Isabella Drive, Drakeford Drive) for kids to get to their new ‘local’ school so it will have to be the bus (if there is one).

Sounds like a scare mongering arguement that the kids are going to die and be injured because of school closures.

I thought it would be more appropriate to state that it appears this tragedy is the result of a child not looking before crossing the road.

To quote the article –
“A lot of the time kids are in a hurry – they want to get home from school and they just don’t think,” he said

Well excluding 2001 which is an outlier the ACT’s current system is looking pretty good, and that’s just fatalities, not including injuries.

Now to restate, it appears this tragedy is the result of a child traveling long distances to school unaccompanied.

The new policy is going to increase the number of children travelling long distances unaccompanied.

Now that may be a cost we’re willing to bear in exchange for the possible savings of super schools and the loot to be had from flogging off all the ovals.

But that’s a trade off we should make consciously.

And I chose Queensland because I grew up there. My friends and I travelled 20km to school every day, using a combination of buses, walking and riding. I’m pretty sure none of us died.

Here are the stats for NSW, QLD, Vic and the ACT if you’re interested. Remember, these are total numbers, not per capita, and those other states have many times as many students as we do, and they have much further to travel over much worse roads with much more traffic.


2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006
NSW 4 3 3 0 1 2 2
VIC 0 1 3 2 2 2 0
QLD 1 2 4 1 1 2 1
ACT 1 0 0 0 0 0 0


Any particular reason you chose Queensland?

Did you mean this gem?

cold hard statistical certainty that for every kilometre travelled by an unaccompanied child there’s a chance of a nasty accident.

Here are some cold hard statistical facts. Let’s compare the wondrous ACT with its plethora of local schools attended by wee cherubs who need only walk out of their bedroom door and straight into a school classroom with someplace monstrous, like Queensland, where urban planning has been left to drunkards and where multiple times as many children must navigate minefields, race tracks and CHUDs to get in front of a blackboard.


QLD ACT
2000 1 1
2001 2 0
2002 4 0
2003 1 0
2004 1 0
2005 2 0
2006 1 0


Data Source: Australian Transport Safety Bureau
Speed Limits: All
States: QLD , ACT
Crash Types: Pedestrian
Ages: 5 To 12
Gender: All
Road Users: All
Hours of the day: 07:00 to 07:59 To 16:00 to 16:59
Days of the week: Mon To Fri
Articulated Truck Involved: Either
Bus Involved: Either

See a pattern? No, neither did I. In 2000 kisd in Queensland with their epic journeys to school were just as safe as their ACT counterpart. In 2006 they were safer. In the other years, there was no significant difference between them. Explain to me again how the ACT’s amazing urban planning and local schools on every corner makes our kids safer?

just because you draw a picture… doesn’t mean that you’re right.

🙂

Did you read the comments woody? The ones where i drew a picture for the slower folk like you?

The added cost of ending local schools?

The schools haven’t closed yet. How the hell do you draw a causal link between two events, one of which hasn’t even happened yet?

Of course back in the day when we had local schools kids could ride or walk.

Yeah, because kids who ride or walk to their local school never, ever get hit by cars. Oh wait – what’s that at the end of the linked article? Two kids were hit on a pedestrian crossing outside Monash just last night – with their mother, no less? Mustn’t have been locals, eh?

Johnboy, the most obvious flaw in your logic is that you seem to assume that when all these school closures happen kids will be taking more buses (possibly true) and therefore crossing more roads than if they just walked to their local school. But that doesn’t make sense at all. Surely if anything more buses would minimise the distance kids have to walk (ie. from their house to the bus stop and from the bus stop to the entrance of their school). As opposed to kids crossing however many roads between their house and their local school. If what you’re suggesting is that buses mean kids will have to cross more *major* roads, then I’d say that isn’t true either. I take your point about there being some costs that might not have been taken into account in thinking about the school closures, but in this instance that idea just doesn’t stack up.

And as for those of you who are saying this is the parents fault, I think that you should be ashamed. Get off your bloody highhorses and perhaps think about the hell they are going through rather than just making mocking judgmental comments from the comfort of your anonymous user name.

Not confusing – just using an awkward metaphor.

And I’m not arguing for Sonic’s outstanding economic management credentials. I just think it’s a step in the right direction for good governance.

I think you’re confusing private and public debt Mr. Shab.

You can’t tell me we’re short on readies in this town while the busway plan is still going ahead to save 2 minutes on the belconnen-civic run.

I’ll give your theory some creedence, Johnboy, because it is logical. I think you’re overstating the danger; and I don’t think it’s danger that can’t be mitigated.

However, your comment that community primary schools were set up with some immutable plan is a bit wide of the mark. They were set up with a plan alright, but a plan that was predicated on a different set of demographics.

The grim, meathook reality of the situation now is that we, like the Australian public, are spending beyond our means. That means in order to survive fiscally, we must find economies. Given what a large wedge of the budget education represents, I think closing a few underpopulated schools for the benefit of others is not such a bad idea (flame away).

I think arguing the case for keeping the schools open with educational outcomes and community cohesion is a much more credible method than using “Today Tonight”-esque “think of the children” material does the keep-em-open camp no favours.

100 metres up from where the child was struck was a set of traffic lights where he could have crossed safely.

Either poor parenting, or poor/lazy decision making by the child – nothing to do with schooling

According to the stats there were 37 passenger deaths and 38 pedestrian deaths last year (Could only find Victorian numbers). So being a pedestrian is more dangerous than a passenger – assuming the kids aren’t the driver.

http://www.tacsafety.com.au/jsp/statistics/roadtollcurrent.do?tierID=100

I think kids that grow up in an environment where they have to be more road concious are better off.. when I moved to melbourne at the ripe old age of 21… I almost had to relearn how to cross roads, having grown up mostly in canberra and small country towns (bar the 6 months I lived in perth)…

Perhaps the new super schools could teach kids to cross the road if it’s too hard for parents.
Fact is, the poor kid didn’t watch where he was going. It was an accident. That’s it.

It makes sense to me. More kids going to schools further away = more bus rides / crossing busy roads = more accidents.
I walked to school, and more recently than the 70s. And I see stacks of kids walking to Ainslie Primary every day.

eg sports equipment, PC labs, books, art equipment, better learning aids in general and the ability to provide more diversity to children.

If these kind of things aren’t done and there is no value added to these larger PS’s – then I am with everyone else…. but I want to see what eventuates first.

What are these mythical facilities needed at primary schools?

High Schools I can understand and agree that consolidation makes some sense.

But I’m still waiting for anyone to explain the what these facilities are we need for primary school students.

The risk is always there whether it is a major road or not… anyway it just makes sense to consolidate the schools, it means they can focus funding, so kids who went to smaller schools (which in any situation wouldn’t get the same funding) will now have access to better facilities. its very very simple to understand.

The majority is usually wrong, I can’t say I’m too concerned (or at all concerned for that matter.

The guys who set up community primary schools didn’t do it because they were stupid and liked wasting money.

They did it because they had a longer term view than the current government.

Grundy,

I sincerely hope that when your fiance and yourself have children, your views on kiddies crossing roads just like ‘dodgy’ junkies changes.

I’ve gotta agree with the crowd JB, you are definately drawing a long bow in this one.

It’s just one of those unfortunate accidents.

JB did your mummy ride the bus with you when you were 12?

When I was nine or ten a mate of mine got killed with the same kind of thing. The fact is kids have not got a developed sense of awareness, they don’t think, because they can’t. Maybe with more kids having to catch buses – this kind of thing could be on the rise – but this issue is not related.

If the problem does escalate however then whoever is responsible at a bureaucratic level will make sure that safety measures are put in place, so that it doesn’t happen.

Remember in sydney ten years ago they had that spate of accidents where school kids would get caught in the doors of the bus when leaving and getting dragged to their death.. the state government put in place measures to stop that. I am sure whoever our government is will do the same.

cold hard stistical certainty that for every lottery ticket I buy theres an increase chance I will win.

i’d like a graph…can you give me a graph??! hehehe…

i see your point… however this student is travelling by bus to a school out of area as a choice by his parents, completely unrelated to the school closures… yes, the number of students that will be forced to do this may increase but this is an issue about teaching kids to be safer on roads and catching buses rather than local schools closing.

cold hard statistical certainty that for every kilometre travelled by an unaccompanied child there’s a chance of a nasty accident.

“What sort of a parent lets a 12 year old child cross one of the consistently busiest roads in the ACT without appropriate supervision?

Lazy fucking parenting in my books.”

This is a rediculous comment!
It had nothing to do with parenting!

It was simply a lapse in attention from this poor kid. The accident happened directly outside my office ( 218 NB ave ) and I walked right through the scene just after it occured ( walking home, not just sticking my nose in ).

But there’s no way you can use a bullshit excuse like “OMGZ!!11 Bad Parents!”… it was a simple accident, not a result of poor parenting, bad schools or bad drivers.

If anything, my fiance and I play ‘Dodge the junkie’ everytime we drive along Northbourne… if you’re a regular driver along there, you’ll know what I mean.

johnboy, how does

“much younger children are going to have to travel much longer distances”

necessarily lead to an increase unfortunate accidents?

johnboy, how does

“much younger children are going to have to travel much longer distances”

lead more unfortunate accidents?

I think the ‘much’ younger children will still be escorted to school – if they have responsible parents.

My child is in year 5. I can’t see me letting her catch a bus on her own next year (or hanging at the mall or movies by herself for that matter).

If she had to catch a bus to school next year, then I would be driving her. At that age, kids need schools close to him, so they can maybe walk there with other kids, and not have to cross major roads.

LG, who still walks her child across the road between Florey School and Florey Shops.

Having just got off a bus, which is a very common place for kids to get hit on roads.

Do I need to draw you a picture?

Dr.Shrink I don’t recall mentioning the Chief Minister’s name in this context, this is about a policy of abandoning a policy of local schools for one of centralised schools.

There are savings in local schools which don’t appear to have been recognised.

perhaps, but that’s got nothing to do with getting hit buy a bus… which obviuosly happened when he was walking.

Typical anti-Stanhope cheap shot.

Anyway, in this mobile city who even walks to school anymore ?. This is the ultimate in suburban cities. Everyone drives or catches a bus to school these days, and they have done since the 70’s.

Might as well rail against Burley Griffin or Henry Ford as Stanhope for this kids injury.

*sigh*

Under a policy of centralised schools much greater numbers of much younger children are going to have to travel much longer distances.

I’m sorry so many of you are too stupid to see a correlation there.

Although kids can get overexcited sometimes (I know I do), by age 12 they should be competently crossing the street.
Where they go to school is irrelevant.

I didn’t read the article this morning because I’d already read an article on the same incident yesterday. I still think 12 years old is old enough not to need constant parental supervision.

Lots of kids catch buses to school every day. I would hardly think it is a rarity nor is there any real correlation between school closures and child pedestrian accidents.

Heaps of kids catch buses for activities that aren’t related to schools (ie take the weekends for example) should we say spralling suburbia and lack of walking distant shopping centres are a contributable factor for child pedestrian accidents ? I think not.

May be harsh but it would appear that its the kids fault. If a 12yo can be left in a shopping centre all day, go to movies unsupervised, etc etc they certainly are old enough to ‘take care’ when crossing a road.

no, but it’s an example of what happens when primary school children have to be bussed to school.

Something that at the moment is a rarity but won’t be for very much longer.

Oh please!

This clearly was not a ‘school closures’ issue.

The student is from Nicholls and attends Ainslie Primary even though there are a number of local primary schools in the Gungahlin area… none of which are closing.

read the article caf, year 6.

is it asking so much for you to bother doing that?

12 years old is year 7, ie highschool. Highschool kids are old enough to make their way home from school on their own, including crossing Northbourne Avenue (well, they were in my day, which wasn’t that long ago). I crossed Northbourne Avenue almost every single day of year 7.

It’s mollycoddling to walk a high school kid home from school. I totally disagree with the lazy parenting line.

Poor lad.

Not sure what his accident has to do with local schools though. Looking at the case as you put it:

Injured children walking = 1 of 1
Injured children on a bus = 0 of 48

It would seem then that we should close more schools as riding the bus is much safer than walking.

well i didn’t want to say that, but it’s something we’re going to see a lot more of.

Nothing to do with the school closures or the Government. What sort of a parent lets a 12 year old child cross one of the consistently busiest roads in the ACT without appropriate supervision?

Lazy fucking parenting in my books.