Campaign banners were displayed outside the Town Hall

PARENTS are refusing to give up on saving a nursery in a council-owned building which now could be just days from shutting its doors – as campaigners lined up on the steps of the Town Hall.

Council chiefs were presented with a petition of more than 5,200 names calling for a pause on the closure plans at the Paradise Park Children’s Centre.

Catrin Shi told Islington’s all-member meeting: “This is about protecting vital jobs which support the wider economy, it’s about protecting a vibrant community and preserving the opportunity for hundreds more Islington families to get the best start for their children.

“It’s about prioritising those things over cost savings or asset stripping, it’s about believing that investment continued here will pay dividends for years to come in terms of better early years provision, lower anti-social behaviour, and a stronger community.”

The nursery is run by the Islington Play Association (IPA) charity which has told the Town Hall that it wants to exit the contract. As the Tribune reported last week, its trustees are not commenting further while talks around the end of the service and the future for its staff are continuing.

Catrin Shi, one of the parents at the nursery, and staff member Lloyd Sherwood delivered the petition to the council

Outside the council’s HQ in Upper Street, supporters were lined up with banners calling on the council to intervene.

But inside the chamber, children’s services chief, Labour councillor Sheila Chapman, repeatedly said that the decision had been taken “unilaterally” by the IPA despite attempts to work with it.

“In terms of why isn’t the local authority stepping and reproviding a nursery, well I asked officers to let me know how much that would cost – it’s upwards of £350,000 a year.

“It’s not prudent to spend up to £350,000 a year to reprovide a nursery just in a particular location when I understand there are sufficient places [across the borough]. That’s not a good use of public money when we’ve got half of our children growing up in poverty.”

Campaigners trying to save the nursery say they have been unfairly branded “fussy” over which council-commissioned childcare services they will accept and where.

“That doesn’t tally with a petition of more than 5,200 signatures,” said Ms Shi. “The truth is that compromises are having to be made by working families, sometimes with significant financial consequences.

“Some families have simply not been able to find a new nursery place, particularly if their child is under two. The pressure and distress brought to the community as a result of this closure is palpable.”

During her public deputation, she turned to the Labour councillors and said: “This is a decision that considerable public funds, council commissioned services, a council-owned building and the welfare of many councillors’ constituents are involved in.

“Islington Labour’s manifesto was titled ‘Standing Up For Islington’: you in this room have the power to stand up for our children.”

The petition called for the pause button to be pressed on the closure and “meaningful engagement” on options on how to save it.

Councillor Sheila Chapman

Some frustrated campaigners have said the council’s declaration to be doing all it could to help families by trying to expand paternity leave did not mean much if it would not do more to save a nursery in one of its own buildings.

Cllr Chapman later faced a series of other questions about the nursery, including whether there had been a delay in telling parents about the closure until after the local elections.

She again reminded the public speakers that it was the IPA which had made the decision.

“We were monitoring after they notified us of some financial difficulties and we were wanting to work with them, but it was their decision that they wanted to exit the contract early.”

Cllr Chapman said the Town Hall would be providing emergency support for parents with nowhere for the summer holidays. She said the council’s 2025 survey on whether Islington was providing sufficient childcare places had shown it was.

“Preference isn’t the same as sufficiency,” she added.

On the building, she said that no decision had been made and “due process” was needed, but that she wanted to see it used “for children, our youth and our families”.