Agenda item

In accordance with paragraph 17 of the Overview and Scrutiny Committee rules, two Members, representing more than one Group, had signed a requisition calling in the decision of the Cabinet. On this occasion Councillors Keith Darvill and Gillian Ford had called in the decision of the Cabinet on 11^th July 2011 relating to the Future Shape of Education Services. The decision of the Cabinet was:

1. To retain in house a smaller number of teams with responsibility for delivering the authority’s statutory duties to vulnerable children and families, and those relating to preventing school failure. (implementation April 2013).

2. (a) To explore two options for the non statutory functions of Hsis  during July:

·        a “soft market testing” exercise to establish the level of external interest in running the service.

2. (b) That a final decision about the “destination” of this service is made following this work (implementation April 2013).

3. To note that work continues to ensure that the non statutory traded services of the Europa Centre, Catering Service, Adult College and the Music School meet their MTFS savings targets, whilst options continue to be explored for the future delivery of these services.

Reasons for decisions:

To ensure that the Council is able to meet its statutory obligations to support children, families and schools, but within a reduced funding envelope, thereby ensuring the provision of high quality schooling to local residents and protecting the most vulnerable children and families

Other options considered and rejected:

To no longer provide statutory services to schools and operate a “free market”, with the associated risks for the future lives of children and families in Havering and the long term reputation of Havering as a place in which businesses wish to locate and families wish to live.

GROUNDS FOR REQUISITION

The requisition had been made:

To examine the options and recommendations contained in the Report to Cabinet.

Specifically, the requisition SOUGHT to clarify the following issues:

• There is no option identified to work with the existing model. Our services have a high buy in rate so what consideration has been given to expanding and growing these services even further into other boroughs?
• In recommendation 2 (b), who will be making the final decision?
• All of the options need to be discussed by the Children & Learning Overview & Scrutiny Committee

Officers advised the Committee that the report to Cabinet reflected the Council’s strategic aim to become a smaller, more streamlined organisation, which as a consequence, changed the principles upon which the services would be delivered. The report also acknowledged the importance of retaining services within the council which ensured that there was;

• A sufficiency of high quality early years and school places, and provision for vulnerable children and adults (up to the age of 25);
• Appropriate assessment and support for the Borough’s most vulnerable children and young people;
• A team to prevent school failure, by prompt and appropriate intervention;
• Improving pupil outcomes by schools, so the council could strengthen the reputation it has within the business community as an attractive area to locate.

It highlighted the impact of a rapidly changing landscape of relationships between schools and the Local Authority, in which:

• Schools had an option to exercise greater freedoms and flexibilities through increased autonomy by conversion to Academy status;
• There was subsequent reduction in the levels of funding received historically by the Council - in addition to the national ‘deficit reduction’ programme;
• The role of the council, through its Children’s Services Department, was defined fundamentally by the delivery of its statutory functions;
• Nationally a network of Teaching Schools, National Leaders in Education and National Support Schools was in place. Schools were being encouraged to further develop the use of this school to school support function particularly to take forward aspects of continuing professional development for staff. This would include support that was available locally through art, music and sports partnerships.

Over the last two to three years there had been a significant change in the diversity of provision for schools.  This new provision included the growth of Academies, Free Schools, Studio Schools and University Technical Colleges (UTCs) i.e. state funded, independent schools where the Local Authority had a smaller statutory role. In Havering there were currently 12 Academies, out of the 18 secondary schools, and one planned UTC (at CEME).  The number of secondary or primary academies in Havering may increase over time.  In addition, as part of Havering’s Primary School Expansion Programme for 2014 onwards, new primary academies and/or Free Schools would develop to fill the need for new schools.

Associated with the changes set out above, there had been changes in the way local authorities were funded for their support to children and young people, and schools.  In particular the way that funding for Academies, Free Schools and UTCs took place i.e. that money previously given to the LA to distribute now by-passed it, and went directly to these schools. This consequent reduction in funding available to support the most vulnerable children and schools was taking place at a time when the council’s overall central funding was being reduced.

In addition to specific ‘education’ grant reductions the council, like all other councils nationally, was looking to reduce its size and cost and had therefore identified MTFS council wide savings targets for all service areas.

In response to questions concerning the steps taken by other local authorities, officers informed the committee that the majority had found it exceedingly difficult to retain services in-house.

Officers were also asked what was happening to the Foundation Years and Independent Advice Service. The committee were informed that these were not mentioned in the report as there were no proposed changes to these services.

The Cabinet decision envisaged a ‘soft market testing’ exercise to establish the level of external interest in running the service (Havering School Improvement Service). The Committee were advised that, as required under the Constitution, officers had been unable to progress with this pending the outcome of this meeting. Similarly reports would be prepared on the future of the Europa Centre, Catering Service, Adult College and the Music School.

Officers informed the Committee that other London Boroughs including Newham, Harrow, Richmond and Hammersmith and Fulham had already adopted the approach envisaged in option 2.

The Committee were advised that the final decision about the ‘destination’ of the Housing School Improvement Service would rest ultimately with the schools.

The proposal that the requisition be upheld (and therefore that the matter be referred to the Cabinet for further consideration) was LOST (by 7 votes to 1).

The voting was as follows:

Councillor McGeary voted for the resolution.

Councillors Binion, Bull, Misir, Oddy, Thompson and Wells, and Anne Ling voted against the resolution.

Councillor Ford Abstained.

It was therefore RESOLVED:

That the requisition of the executive decision by Cabinet dated 11 July 2012 not be upheld.

The voting was as follows:

Councillors Binion, Bull, Misir, Oddy, Thompson and Wells, and Anne Ling voted for the resolution.

Councillor McGeary voted against.

Councillor Ford Abstained.