Agenda item

The Council has published a legal notice proposing to be relieved of its duty to implement the proposal to close Culverhay School and a decision is required to determine the proposal

Councillor Gerry Curran (Chair of Governors, Culverhay School) made a statement saying that he was pleased that Cabinet would consider revoking the notice of closure.  Now that the consultation period for revocation had ended he asked the Cabinet to confirm the revocation so that the school could continue its plans to work towards sponsored academy status and, in due course, towards coeducational education so that it could effectively serve the local community.

Councillor Dine Romero made an ad hoc statement urging the Cabinet to confirm the revocation.  She felt that the recent school open evening had demonstrated how many parents were interested in sending their children to the school if it were to become a coeducational academy.  She said that this showed that the uncertainty about the school’s future had persuaded many parents from sending their children there in 2011, but that in 2012 this would be more than reversed.  This would require the school to move rapidly to accept girls.

Sarah Moore made an ad hoc statement in which she said that the community would be very pleased if Cabinet were to revoke the notice of closure.  It was what parents had been waiting to hear.

Councillor Tony Clarke made an ad hoc statement, saying that the Conservative Group position was that once closure had been revoked, the Group would be supportive of the school’s application for academy status.  He asked for reassurance about the freehold ownership of the site and an assurance that other schools would not suffer because of the significant cost of keeping Culverhay open.

Councillor Eleanor Jackson made an ad hoc statement endorsing the views of previous speakers.  She observed that she had heard assurances that the freehold of the site would remain with the Council.  She felt that the Council should ask the Secretary of State to announce his decision as soon as possible so that parents could make their decisions about 2012 fully informed of the facts.

Councillor Nathan Hartley, in proposing the item, observed that the proposal being considered by Cabinet was the result of a long campaign to save Culverhay School.  Many people had worked hard to get to this point.  He thanked Ashley Ayre (Strategic Director, People) and Tony Parker (Divisional Director Learning and Inclusion Service) for the hard work they had undertaken in the last few months.  He explained that during the consultation period, negative submissions had been received from one B&NES Councillor (out of 65), 3 Head Teachers (out of 70+ and only 2 Chairs of Governors (out of 70+). He emphasised that the correct legal process had been followed to get to the current point.

In response to Councillor Eleanor Jackson’s reference to the Secretary of State, Councillor Hartley said that the Council had been determined to allow the Secretary of State to make up his own mind on the options available.  He observed that the Liberal Democrat Group had for 20 years said that Culverhay should be allowed to become co-educational, and had this been achieved, the school would never have suffered the reduction in its intake.  He responded to Councillor Tony Clarke by saying that there had never been any finance available to other schools, and no such promises should have been made. He confirmed that no other school would suffer financially as a result of a decision to revoke closure.  He also confirmed that the freehold of the site would remain with the Council, whatever the eventual outcome for the school’s future.  Finally, he was delighted to see that the intake had risen from 21 in 2011 (when the school was threatened with closure) to about 70 expressions of interest for the 2012 intake (assuming a coeducational intake).

Councillor Paul Crossley seconded the proposal.  He said that, if Cabinet revoked the closure notice, he would write to the Secretary of State pointing out the Council’s position.  He was delighted that the Cabot Learning Foundation was set to become involved with the school.  He felt that it had been the right decision for all four Group Leaders to sign the recent letter to the Secretary of State supporting Academy status for the school.  He envisaged that Bath would have a very good mix of coeducational, single-sex and faith schools which had been the Council’s aim for a number of years.

Councillor Dave Dixon referred to paragraph 3.6 of the report and pointed out that “CPR Overview and Scrutiny Panel” should read “Resources Policy Development and Scrutiny Panel”.  He had been very disappointed to see some interested parties apparently pitting one school against another, and he hoped it would never happen again.

Councillor David Bellotti referred to paragraph 3 of the report (Financial Implications) and said that the assumptions of the Schools Forum had been wrong because they had been incorrectly led to believe that the £700K cost of keeping the school open would fall on the Council.  But this was not true, because as was known, the school had applied for Academy status and therefore the costs would fall on the Secretary of State.  On the contrary, had the school been closed, the redundancy costs would have fallen to the Council and these would have been £1M.

Councillor Bellotti referred to the long running argument about surplus places in Bath.  He said that there were 700 places, spread over 7 schools.  The previous administration had incorrectly used children from outside the authority to make the surplus appear worse.  He felt strongly that the authority must run with a number of surplus places, so as to give parents a real choice of schools.  He observed that the birth rate was rising, and that the effect of this is a few years would be that the authority might need to build new schools, not close existing ones.

Councillor Roger Symonds welcomed the prospect that a coeducational school might be established at Culverhay.  He was delighted that this had become a real possibility.

Councillor Cherry Beath endorsed the previous statements.  She felt that the previous administration had made very poor judgements and that was why the local community had made their feelings known so strongly.  She welcomed and valued the diversity that the proposals would make possible.

Councillor Tim Ball added that in his community, the main topic of conversation had been that Culverhay should stay open to serve the whole community.  He observed that the previous administration had failed to acknowledge that the school was used by a number of community groups, and had a thriving sports centre.

On a motion from Councillor Nathan Hartley, seconded by Councillor Paul Crossley, it was

RESOLVED (unanimously)

(1)  To REVOKE the decision to close Culverhay School, to enable the school to stay open