Agenda item

Call-in of Cabinet Decision E3037 Primary and Secondary School Organisation Plan 2017 - 2021

This report sets out the Call-in received from 10 Councillors of the decision relating to the Primary & Secondary Organisation Plan 2017-2021. The role of the Panel is to consider the issues raised by the Call-in notice and to determine its response.

Minutes:

Councillor Paul Crossley, Lead Call-In Member addressed the Panel, a summary of his statement is set out below.

 

I hope to be able to persuade you to refer this policy back to Cabinet for reconsideration and amendment.

 

As a Council and as Councillors we seek to ensure that we balance and provide resources on a just and equitable basis (as far as is possible) across all residents in the authority area.

 

Education is one of the most valuable services that the public sector provides to people in exchange for the taxes they pay. Children only get one chance at a secondary education and in this authority area we can be justifiably proud that regardless of administrative format or mix of Councillors, it has always ensured that our young people get the best possible start in life.

 

This call-in is about the equitable access to schools in the City of Bath to all the children of the City and surrounding villages. We have no major problem with the decision that the Cabinet has reached on access to secondary education in the NE Somerset part of the area.

 

We do, though, consider that the policy reached for the city schools has some major flaws that need to be reviewed and revised. It cannot be right that a policy for school allocations disadvantages an entire section of the community and that further that section contains the most disadvantaged sector of our city in terms of income and health.

 

The current proposal means that children from the lowest income houses will:

 

1. See its children sent to the farthest away school from their homes,

2. Involve them in the longest journey times,

3. Cost them the most expensive journey to school – except of course for those few who will be more than 3 miles away from St. Mark’s.

 

For passengers up to the age of 15 a FIRST DAY ticket is £2.10 and for those pupils over 15 the ticket price is £3.00. I will let you contemplate the maths for 190 school day bus trips. From anywhere in the SW of Bath to get to St Marks requires 2 bus journeys.

 

THIS CANNOT BE RIGHT

 

The current proposal means that children with the most social disadvantages and the most likely to have additional needs will be sent to school the furthest from home.

 

THIS CANNOT BE RIGHT

 

The current proposal will generate the maximum number of extra car journeys at a time when as a Council and as a Community we are becoming more and more aware of the need for clean air.

 

THIS CANNOT BE RIGHT

 

Finally, the current proposal does not adequately address the fact that children from outside the authority area are attending our schools. I welcome the fact that children from outside B&NES choose to be educated in our schools but as we have lost a secondary school at the Rush Hill site any policy must give priority access to our children over any from any other authority.

 

It must be the case that applications from our parents in the City take priority over any application from outside the City Consortium Planning area.

 

The fundamental flaw in the Bath side of the equation is that Bath is treated as one planning area whilst NE Somerset is treated as several.

 

Therefore if the Panel addresses this flaw it will be able to make recommendations that guide the Cabinet in revising its allocation policy and ensure that families from the SW of Bath get a fair deal in seeking the school of their choice. 

 

Councillor Liz Hardman asked if the closure of Bath Community Academy (BCA) had been a contributory factor to this process.

 

Councillor Crossley replied that fellow Councillors will recall that he passionately wanted BCA to remain open. He said that a high % of children that did attend BCA would have had some degree of special needs and would have found it difficult to enter other schools.

 

He added that if BCA were still open following this summer then there would not be such a problem.

 

Councillor Matt Cochrane said that he could see that this has been a difficult year for families in South West Bath, but opposing this plan will not change the ability to access Beechen Cliff, Ralph Allen or St. Gregory’s.

 

Councillor Crossley replied that the Council should seek to challenge the framework as much as possible and that schools will be aware that Governments can introduce new legislation.

 

Councillor Lizzie Gladwyn commented that Call-In does not relate to the admissions process and that the Council currently cannot enforce schools to address their admissions criteria.

 

Councillor Crossley replied that Council policy must be equitable to provide to all the communities of Bath. He added that this issue must be expressed to school leaders.

 

Councillor Paul May, Cabinet Member for Children & Young People addressed the Panel, a summary of his statement is set out below.

 

He said that the formulation of a School Organisation Plan to identify the provision of education places has been in place since 1999 and that the Council sets out where places are available across a three year period.

 

He explained that the process in creating the Plan is transparent and has previously been debated by this Panel, the Cabinet and that Schools have been consulted in its development. He added that it remains a living plan and is one that will look to help successful schools to expand.

 

He stated that officers have reported on the publication of a new Plan over many years and that he felt that many of the reasons stated for the Call-In refer to admissions rather than allocation.

 

He said that even though a five preference system had been introduced many families did not use this to the best of its ability.

 

He said that ¾ of pupils who have been allocated St. Mark’s are now due to receive Home to School Transport.

 

With regard to BCA he said that it was financially failing and not enough pupils / families were choosing to attend it. He added that he would continue a dialogue with Ward Members in SW Bath directly.

 

The Chair asked if current schools do expand will pupils from outside of B&NES still be allowed to attend.

 

Councillor May replied that in due course he will look to address the issue of pupils from outside of B&NES attending our schools.

 

Councillor Liz Hardman asked if the five preference system required a rethink as it did not work as intended this year.

 

Councillor May replied that he did feel that some parents had been let down by the system not being explained widely enough.

 

Councillor Hardman asked how many pupils have been allocated St. Mark’s through the admissions process having not been successful in the preferences they gave.

 

The Corporate Director replied that this figure was 86. He added that the Director of Education Transformation was working with the school in preparation for September and that additional funding had been secured from the Schools Forum.

 

Councillor Sally Davis asked how sure the Council can be that it is aware of any plans that schools have to expand.

 

The Corporate Director replied that he felt sure as there was an ongoing dialogue with schools on this issue. He wished to add that the work of fellow officers should be recognised for gaining further places at schools for this September.

 

Councillor Matt Cochrane asked how he thought Councillor Romero’s proposal of dividing the City into three sections would work.

 

The Corporate Director replied that he was not sure what effect this would have as each school sets its own admissions criteria and the Council has no control over that. He added that a challenge to the criteria is allowed through the Department for Education.

 

Councillor May commented that the Council needs to retain the services of its staff in this work area as respect exists between them and the local schools.

 

The Chair asked if the Council does speak to schools regarding their admissions criteria.

 

The Corporate Director replied that it does and that most are willing to discuss issues when they occur.

 

Councillor May added that he would ask officers to bring a set of proposals to the Panel regarding the admissions process and the criteria of local schools.

 

Councillor Peter Turner asked if the problems that have been mentioned are reflected nationally.

 

The Corporate Director replied that the same legislation regarding academies is in effect across the country. He added that the contributing factors to the problems faced this year have been the closure of BCA, some schools have decreased their Planned Admission Number (PAN) and there has been an increase in new housing locally.

 

He informed the Panel that historically 75% of families within B&NES apply for school places within the authority and that this year that figure was 85%, which in actual numbers is an additional 107 pupils.

 

Councillor Paul May in his closing statement to the Panel said that the Plan proposed was a sensible one and should proceed as decided by the Cabinet. He acknowledged that future work was required to address issues raised with regard to the South West of Bath.

 

Councillor Paul Crossley gave a closing statement to the Panel. He said in response to the figures given by the Corporate Director that officers should consider planning for an even higher percentage next year. He stated that he would also be monitoring the statement made by Councillor May in relation to the numbers of pupils who will receive Home to School Transport.

 

He said that the current South West of Bath community will find it difficult to reach their allocated school and called for the Council to lead by example to gain equitable access. He asked the Panel to refer the decision back to the Cabinet.

 

The Chair asked how the Home to School Transport would be provided.

 

The Corporate Director replied that it could be via a bus pass or a specific bus could be allocated to a group of pupils living in the same area.

 

Amanda Whitelock asked if the transport would be in place for the duration of the pupils being in secondary school and how would it affect their participation in after school clubs.

 

The Corporate Director replied that transport would be in place throughout the attendance at secondary school. He added that talks would need to take place regarding any flexibility of the service provided.

 

Councillor Liz Hardman said that she felt that the Plan was deeply flawed and that parents and their children were being penalised by the new preference system. She moved that the Call-in should be upheld and that the decision should be reconsidered by the Cabinet.

 

Councillor Michelle O’Doherty said that she would second the proposal made by Councillor Hardman. She said that it would not be an easy journey for pupils to make from Whiteway to Larkhall and that the Council should be mindful of enabling young people to participate in after school activities and to walk to a school nearer to home especially with increasing childhood obesity levels. She added the points raised relating to air quality and the financial impacts on families should also be considered.

 

The motion was put to the vote and it was RESOLVED by 3 votes for and 4 votes against. The motion therefore was not carried.

 

Councillor Matt Cochrane proposed a motion that the Call-in should be dismissed. He said that he did not believe that the Plan reflected the problems that were currently being experienced. He added that he would like the issues raised by and on behalf of families in South West Bath to be monitored.

 

Councillor Lizzie Gladwyn seconded the motion. She said that it would be good for the Panel to receive some feedback on discussions had with schools regarding admissions criteria and how the five preference system can be better communicated to parents.

 

The motion was put to the vote and it was RESOLVED by 4 votes for and 3 votes against that the Call-in should be dismissed.

 

This means that the decision made by the Cabinet can take place with immediate effect.

 

The Chair thanked all those present for attending and contributing to the debate.

Supporting documents: