Meeting documents

1 WELCOME AND INTRODUCTIONS

The Chair was taken by Councillor Francine Haeberling, Leader of the Council.

The Chair welcomed everyone to the meeting.

2 EMERGENCY EVACUATION PROCEDURE

The Chair drew attention to the emergency evacuation procedure as set out on the Agenda

3 APOLOGIES FOR ABSENCE

There were none.

4 DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST UNDER THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT ACT 1972

There were none.

Councillor Malcolm Hanney declared a personal and non-prejudicial interest relating to Agenda Item 13, as Chair of the Primary Care Trust.

5 TO ANNOUNCE ANY URGENT BUSINESS AGREED BY THE CHAIR(PERSON)

There was none.

6 QUESTIONS FROM PUBLIC AND COUNCILLORS

There were 9 questions from the following people: Councillor Nigel Roberts (3), Councillor Nathan Hartley (2), Councillor Neil Butters, Councillor Roger Symonds, Jane Brown - Bath Preservation Trust (2).

[Copies of the questions and responses, including supplementary questions and responses if any, have been placed on the Minute book as Appendix 1 and are available on the Council's website.]

7 STATEMENTS, DEPUTATIONS OR PETITIONS FROM PUBLIC AND COUNCILLORS

Councillor Nathan Hartley made a statement in which he referred to the ongoing problem of homeless young people in the Radstock area. He referred to the plight of 11 homeless young people who had been squatting in a disused school and to those who slept in cars, on sofas, or in a single room at the home of their parents or friends. He presented a petition to Cabinet which called upon the Council to provide a youth foyer in Radstock to remedy the situation.

The Chair referred the petition to Councillor Vic Pritchard for a response.

Councillor Pritchard said that he would consider the petition and would refer it to the Children & Young People Overview & Scrutiny Panel who would be conducting a review of homelessness.

Councillor Dr Eleanor Jackson made a statement in support of the petition. She pointed out that there was no single archetypal homeless person and highlighted a number of individual cases. She urged the Cabinet to agree that the best solution would be a foyer in Radstock with a number of short-term and longer-term bedsits and felt that this would be cost-effective by avoiding the expense of supporting more acute problems in later years. Although Councillor Jackson did not want to pre-empt the work being done by the Scrutiny panels, she felt that a multi-agency approach could solve the problem.

8 MINUTES: WEDNESDAY 5^th March 2008

On a motion from Councillor Francine Haeberling, seconded by Councillor Vic Pritchard, it was

RESOLVED that the minutes of the meeting held on Wednesday 5^th March 2008 be confirmed as a correct record and signed by the Chair(person)

9 CONSIDERATION OF SINGLE MEMBER ITEMS NOW REQUISITIONED TO COUNCIL EXECUTIVE

There were none.

10 CONSIDERATION OF MATTERS REFERRED BY OVERVIEW AND SCRUTINY BODIES

There were none.

11 REVIEW OF SECONDARY SCHOOLS IN BATH & NE SOMERSET (Report 11).

Sheila Carrick, a parent at Oldfield School, made a statement [a copy of which is attached to the Minutes as Appendix 2] in which she urged the Cabinet not to decide to close Oldfield School.

David Allen, Vice-Chair of Governors, Oldfield School, made a statement [a copy of which is attached to the Minutes as Appendix 3] in which he said that the Governors of the School were eager to become co-educational and urged the Cabinet not to decide to close the school.

Councillor Chris Watt asked Mr Allen whether the Governors had committed to become co-educational on the basis of the feasibility study which had been presented to the Governors in January.

Mr Allen confirmed that this was so.

Maureen Bollard, Director of Education, Diocese of Bath & Wells, made a statement [a copy of which is attached to the Minutes as Appendix 4] saying that a new faith school constituted from Oldfield and St Mark's would benefit from the best of each; and urging the Cabinet to adopt this approach. She made the case that Anglican schools, far from being doctrinaire, are open to dialogue about both religious and secular responses to the world. An Anglican school replacing the two existing schools would therefore serve all of its local community.

Cherril Pope, Head of St Mark's School, made a statement [a copy of which is attached to the Minutes as Appendix 5] in which she urged the Cabinet to adopt the proposal to close and merge Oldfield and St Marks Schools; and that the best location for the merged school would be a site equidistant between the two existing schools because of travel to school issues.

Julie Cope, a parent at Oldfield School, made a statement [a copy of which is attached to the Minutes as Appendix 6] urging the Cabinet to adopt an approach which would enable Oldfield School to become co-educational. She felt that closure should be a last option for a failing school, not for an outstandingly successful school.

Kay Carpenter, a parent at Oldfield School, made a statement [a copy of which is attached to the Minutes as Appendix 7] urging the Cabinet to rethink the proposals. Her experience that the school had consistently improved over the last 6 years. She felt that there was little demand for a new faith school in the area.

Stephen Young, a parent of 2 children at Oldfield School, made a statement in which he spoke of the commitment of the staff and the inclusive ethos of the school. He expressed his particular appreciation of the secular nature of the school and urged the Cabinet not to replace it with a faith school.

Pippa Page made a statement explaining that, although a Christian, she could not support proposals to close Oldfield School to create a faith school. She was concerned about the need to encourage young people to walk to school, and believed that a merged school would create longer journeys to school and would therefore reduce the numbers walking. She also felt that a new school would be in danger of increasing the number of applications from families in south Gloucestershire and Wiltshire, making it more difficult for Bath families to gain places.

Nigel Sheppard, a parent of 2 pupils at Oldfield School, made a statement [a copy of which is attached to the Minutes as Appendix 8] in which he referred to the danger of "blight" which would affect Oldfield School if the threat of closure were to be left hanging over it. He felt that the proposals were ill conceived and were motivated by the lure of government funding to build a new school.

Synam Gotru, a parent of 2 children at Oldfield School, made a statement in which he appealed to the Cabinet not to close the school. He had been tremendously impressed with the quality of teaching at the school and felt that closure would destroy all that had been built up.

Vivienne Cummin made a statement [a copy of which is attached to the Minutes as Appendix 9] in which she referred to the firm foundations on which Oldfield School was based - the ethos of the school. She urged the Cabinet to reconsider carefully its proposals to close the school.

Robert Lewis, a parent of children at Oldfield School, made a statement [a copy of which is attached to the Minutes as Appendix 10] in which he referred to the "outstanding" OFSTED report awarded to the school. He felt that standards could not be improved by closing the only "outstanding" school in Bath.

Robert Page, a parent of a child at Oldfield School, made a statement urging the Cabinet to consider the blighting effect these proposals were having on the school. He was concerned for those who would be the victim of this blight and asked what provision had been made for the new residents of Western Riverside.

Emma Croker, an ex-pupil of Oldfield School, made a statement attributing her personal and academic success to the outstanding ethos of the school. She had been encouraged to learn, think and make the most of her opportunities by staff at the school. She appealed to the Cabinet to handle the changes sensitively.

Gillian Aghajan, parent of an ex-pupil of Oldfield School and twice a Parent Governor, appealed to the Local Authority to build on the excellence already there in the school. She argued strongly for real parental choice and explained how important that was to herself, her husband and their daughter.

Councillor Caroline Roberts made a statement on behalf of Councillor Loraine Brinkhurst [who was unable to attend]. Councillor Roberts reminded the Cabinet of the strength of feeling displayed by parents and Governors of Oldfield School and urged to Cabinet to take into account all the views they would hear during the consultation period. She would very soon pass on to the Cabinet Member the 30 representations received from Oldfield parents about the issue.

Councillor Paul Crossley made an ad hoc statement in which he acknowledged how difficult this decision would be. He thanked the members of the Overview and Scrutiny Panels, the Cabinet Member, education officers and parents of the schools for their contributions to the debate. He congratulated the Heads of both schools for their remarkable success. Councillor Crossley reminded the Cabinet that they had promised to take full account of all previous contributions when making their decision. He asked the Cabinet to consider 4 points:

Councillor Adrian Inker made an ad hoc statement in which he too congratulated the Heads and staff of both schools for delivering excellent education. Difficult decisions would need to be taken but the outcome must meet the agenda of "Every Child Matters". The difficulties faced in Bath by the need to provide a mix of co-educational and faith schools must be resolved. He urged the Cabinet to consider carefully the provision of 6^th Form education, especially at Broadlands with its existing link to Norton Radstock College. He reminded Cabinet that the consultation must be meaningful and thorough.

Councillor Chris Watt, in proposing the item, said that if Oldfield School was in fact willing to switch to co-educational on the basis of the feasibility report as confirmed by David Allen, then this was the first time that had been made clear. He reminded the meeting that there were surplus places in many schools in Bath and this situation must be resolved because it had proved to be very expensive. He disagreed that the authority would be obliged to accept children from other areas because one of the proposals being consulted on was to amend the admissions procedures to give priority to local children. He said that his professional expertise in market research gave him a high level of confidence that the planned secondary provision for Western Riverside children was perfectly adequate.

Councillor Watt said that the proposals were clear - only 1 secondary school was required in the north of the city. The Cabinet wished to bring together the best of both schools but the Governors of the two existing Foundation schools had failed to work together to achieve this. The Council therefore had no option but to propose closure and reprovision in a new school. He said that his personal preference would have been a merger with the active support of both Governing Bodies.

Councillor Watt referred to the amended proposals which had been made available in the public gallery before the meeting. He explained aspects of the timetable for consultation and explained that the strategy was not only about 2 schools, but in fact covered the whole district. He commended the amended proposals to the Cabinet.

Councillor Malcolm Hanney seconded the proposal. He reminded the meeting that substantial consultation had already been undertaken about the issue. In particular, he referred to the 2 Overview and Scrutiny Reviews whose recommendations had fed into the current proposals. This was the first attempt to consider secondary provision across the whole district in the 13 years since the authority was created and he emphasised that the proposals had arisen out of cross-party collaboration at many levels.

Councillor Charles Gerrish acknowledged that change is stressful but reminded the meeting that the new 3-Ways School had proved to be the right decision. He felt that Keynsham would benefit from having a single secondary school - not least because of the removal of divisions created by having separate schools for a whole generation. He welcomed the proposals to move the visual impairment unit at Broadlands so that it would not be lost to the community. He expressed his concerns that the playing fields at Broadlands, which are extensively used by the community, might be lost; he asked for a full review of community sport in Keynsham before any decision would be taken. He agreed with Councillor Crossley that a co-educational school at Culverhay would serve the community well.

Councillor Chris Watt promised to consider carefully the impact the proposals would have on travel to school. He assured the meeting that school assets, if sold, would stay in the schools estate and the Council was proud of its insistence on this principle. He promised to consider carefully the issue raised by Councillor Gerrish about the playing fields at Broadlands. He emphasised that transitional arrangements would be agreed with schools to ensure continuity of best practice, ethos and success. This would be possible because the timetable for change would be clear, so as to enable proper planning. He summed up by reminding the meeting that the proposals were about the whole of Bath & NE Somerset and would benefit all the authority's pupils.

Rationale

The decision reflects the findings of the Overview & Scrutiny Panel and results from extensive consultation with schools and other stakeholders.

Other Options Considered

The Overview & Scrutiny Panel had considered a range of options for the future organisation of secondary schools, which were set out in their report.

On a motion from Councillor Chris Watt, seconded by Councillor Malcolm Hanney, it was

RESOLVED (unanimously)

1) To approve the Review of Secondary Education Provision in Bath and North East Somerset as the strategic framework for future decision making re. secondary school provision.

2) To note that changes to specific schools are contingent upon access to capital funding and therefore unlikely to take effect before September 2014.

3) To authorise the Strategic Director of Children's Services, in consultation with affected schools, to put in place all necessary arrangements, including changes to admission and other policies and arrangements to enable the proposed changes to take place when capital resources are secured.

4) To authorise the Cabinet Member for Children's Services and the Strategic Director to explore funding options (including an early wave of Building Schools for the Future if possible) to renew and remodel all secondary schools.

5) The specific proposals are:

5.1 Bath

(i) Culverhay School

Consult upon the closure of the present boy's school and re-opening as a new 11-18 co-educational community school or Academy on the current site with a planned admission number (PAN) of 160. The new school to be determined by means of a competition to secure the most effective sponsor partner should the new school be an academy.

(ii) St Mark's Church of England School/Oldfield School

Consult upon the closure of both schools and the opening of a new 11-18 co-educational Church of England school in the north of the city with a PAN of 160. The new school to build on the strengths of St Mark's and Oldfield and ensure that staffs of both schools have equal access to posts in the new school and all pupils at the two schools can attend the new school. The consultation to determine the site.

(iii) Hayesfield School for Girls/Beechen Cliff School for Boys

Retention of both schools as the single sex options for children within the city of Bath with PANs of 160.

(iv) Ralph Allen School

Retention of Ralph Allen school as a 11-18 co-educational school with a PAN of 175.

(v) St Gregory's Catholic College

Retention of St Gregory's Catholic College as an 11-16 Catholic school with a PAN of 160.

(vi) Admission System

Consult on a process to achieve a fair and equitable admission system for all children across the city of Bath.

5.2 Keynsham and Chew Valley

(a) Keynsham

(i) Consult on the closure of Broadlands Community School and the expansion of Wellsway Community School to create a single secondary school with a planned admission number of 260 places each year, the single school to be re-built under the BSF programme.(ii) Support the governing bodies of the two schools to explore Federation options at an appropriate time in the future so that:

- an eventual intake of 260 pupils can be achieved.

- a planned process of staffing changes is in place as pupil numbers reduce towards the Planned Admission Number of 260 and to ensure the School provides a high quality and inclusive curriculum.

(b) Chew Valley

(i) Subject to the outcome of (a)(i) above, consult on the expansion of the PAN of Chew Valley school to 216 and to re-designate Whitchurch Village into the Chew Valley school catchment area/area of prime responsibility.

5.3 Norton Radstock

No change to the current pattern of provision. However as part of the Building Schools for the Future Programme, Writhlington school is being rebuilt and the remodelling of Norton Hill and Somervale is planned in the later phases of the Programme.

12 ASSET MANAGEMENT PLAN (Report 12).

Councillor Paul Crossley made an ad hoc statement congratulating Councillor Hanney and the Division Director of Property for their excellent report. He asked that consideration be given to strengthening the community management aspects of the plan (eg at Roundhill Nature reserve). He appealed to the Cabinet not to agree to use funds from the sale of assets to build new offices for the Council.

Councillor Dr Eleanor Jackson made an ad hoc statement in which she observed that the plan demonstrated sensible stewardship of the Council's assets. She expressed concern over the possibility that in certain circumstances some community based properties might be sold.

Councillor Malcolm Hanney, in proposing the item, emphasised that the commercial estate must be managed with an eye to what else is happening in Bath. He was determined to wean the Council off the need to use income from the commercial estate to fund the revenue budget. He assured the meeting that any disposals would be based on long-term value, not on short-term expediency.

With regard to Councillor Jackson's point about community properties, he promised to refer officers to the report of the Oct/Nov 2007 when considering this. He assured Councillor Jackson that there would be a strong future for Radstock.

Councillor David Hawkins seconded the proposal.

Councillor Malcolm Hanney summed up by assuring Councillor Crossley that the Council would not use any income from the commercial estate to fund a new office building. In giving this assurance, he wished to prevent any unhelpful rumours before they began. He was determined that any new building must be sustainable in revenue terms.

Rationale

To set out a framework by which the Council's assets can contribute to the overall vision for the area by:

(1) giving access to capital resources;

(2) minimising the impact on revenue budgets;

(3) making the best use of Assets;

(4) enhancing governance and improved robust management of Capital and Revenue flows.

Other Options Considered

None.

On a motion from Councillor Malcolm Hanney, seconded by Councillor David Hawkins, it was

RESOLVED (unanimously)

1) To approve the Asset Management Plan, incorporating the corresponding action plan and the Property Policy (protocol);

2) To authorise the Chief Property Officer, in consultation with the Cabinet Member for Resources, to make minor changes to the documents in advance of a formal review at the end of the financial year.

[At this point, Councillor Malcolm Hanney gave his apologies and left the meeting]

13 BATH & NE SOMERSET LOCAL AREA AGREEMENT 2008-11 (Report 13).

Councillor Paul Crossley made an ad hoc statement welcoming the report. He thanked the Divisional Director, Policy and Partnerships and his team for producing such a clear and well-considered proposal. He felt that the final range of indicators would serve the Council well and was especially pleased to see that the indicator on employment of young people with learning difficulties had been adopted but observed that the adoption of only a 2% CO₂ reduction target was not as challenging as other councils had set.

Councillor Francine Haeberling, in proposing the item, said that she was very happy to note that the targets reflected very well the Council's priorities. She said that the Government Office of the South West had been impressed with the targets selected.

Councillor Charles Gerrish seconded the proposal.

Councillor Chris Watt was pleased to see the inclusion of targets for improving school buildings and improving the life chances of disadvantaged children.

Councillor Vic Pritchard said that he was pleased to note the inclusion of indicators for employment of people with learning difficulties and of adults with mental health difficulties who are in settled accommodation.

Rationale

The Local Area Agreement has been developed using a robust evidence base of the issues facing Bath & North East Somerset over the next few years. This evidence base compared issues from the whole framework of the Social, Environmental and Economic spectrum. This has been shared with partners and has been considered alongside evidence of existing performance in order to set out those issues which the Local Strategic Partnership wishes to focus more of its time and resource.

Other Options Considered

The Local Area Agreement was developed looking at a range of issues and a judgement was made based on the rationale above, to focus on the proposed indicators as areas where we need to have greatest impact over the LAA period.

On a motion from Councillor Francine Haeberling, seconded by Councillor Charles Gerrish, it was

RESOLVED (unanimously)

1) To approve the current draft of the Local Area Agreement for Bath & North East Somerset for negotiation with Government of the South West;

2) To authorise the Chief Executive to finalise the document for submission in consultation with the Leader of the Council in light of such negotiations;

3) To authorise the Chief Executive to sign the Local Area Agreement for Bath & North East Somerset on behalf of the Council.

The meeting ended at 12:02pm

Chair(person)

Date Confirmed and Signed