Agenda item

In late February 2011, a Cabinet decision was made about Culverhay School that was then called in during early March.  The Children and Young People Overview and Scrutiny Panel considered the reasons for submitting the call-in request, with additional information and evidence, and decided to refer the call-in request to Council.

The Council considered a report setting out the options for consideration regarding the call-in of the decision to close Culverhay school.

Following statements from the public, the Monitoring Officer advised on the nature of the debate and the options open to the Council.

On a motion from Councillor Dine Romero, seconded by Councillor Nigel Roberts, it was

RESOLVED to agree to uphold the call-in, in the light of the reasons in the  call-in request (appendix 3 of the report), and those expressed by the Children and Young People Panel when referring the issue to Council, and therefore refer the decision back to Cabinet for reconsideration, for the following reasons;

a.  The clear wish of the community for a co-educational school at Culverhay shown by the results of the various consultations on the future of Culverhay;

b.  The results of the parent survey, which showed that a co-educational school would attract significantly more pupils;

c.  The change in the legislative framework at a national level, which is already having an impact on local education; and

d.  The change in Council Administration since the decision was made, and the resulting change in policy, including the new Administration’s willingness to make funding available for the co-educational transition to take place.

(Note: 1. The above resolution was carried with 36 Councillors present voting in favour, no Councillors present voting against and 26 Councillors present abstaining from voting. 

2. Councillor Tony Clarke moved an amendment, seconded by Councillor Colin Barrett, the effect of which would defer a decision to uphold or reject the call-in pending further consultation with the school and the Schools Forum and requesting further financial and strategic detail regarding proposals.  That amendment was not carried with 36 Councillors present voting against, 23 Councillors present voting in favour, with 2 abstentions.