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 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 Commissioning School Places Strategy 2012/13 – 2015/16.

The decision of the Cabinet was:

1.      To approve the draft Commissioning School Places Strategy 2012/13-2016/17 (CSPS)

2.      To approve the circulation of the draft CSPS for consultation to all stake holders in school place planning

3.      To delegate the determination of the final CSPS, to the Cabinet Member for Children Service’s and the Group Director for Children’s Services.

4.    To note that a further report will be going to Cabinet in September 2012, which will set out the details of each expansion scheme, the consultation process and indicative costs and funding for each scheme

Reasons for decisions:

This decision was necessary to progress the strategy for ensuring there were sufficient school places in Havering to meet the rising pupil population.

Other options considered and rejected:

It was considered that the Council could proceed with the expansion programme without an agreed CSPS in place.  However as the Council was in the leadership role for this major and long term expansion programme, it should be consulting with stake holders on its proposed strategy for meeting the challenge of  the rising school population and in so doing reduce the risk of these plans being unsuccessful.

GROUNDS FOR REQUISITION

The decision had been called in on the following grounds:

1. To examine the availability of spare accommodation which would meet some of the increased demand (see para. 2.4. of the Report to Cabinet)
2. To examine the implications of the proposed strategy for home to school travel particularly relating to primary schools.
3. To consider the financial difficulties that schools will face as a consequence of the increase in pupil numbers in the current funding arrangements.
4. Page 58, 4^th paragraph down it quotes 2006/07 as the beginning of the birth rate rise however in the second paragraph from the bottom it suggests 2007/08 as the beginning of the increase. Could you please confirm the correct year. It had therefore been requested if the correct year could be confirmed.
5. Page 61, 4^th paragraph down, 2^nd sentence needed re wording as it did not currently make sense.
6. Page 64, 2^nd paragraph from the bottom refers to the Technical feasibility work on secondary schools, is this all schools including academies or just community schools?
7. In fairly recent times we have experienced school closures and amalgamations; under the premise primary numbers were falling. How have you mitigated the risk against unnecessary growth or insufficient growth?
8. Admissions are currently overseen by the authority in partnership with schools; however Academies and Free Schools will determine their own admission numbers. What measures are being put in place to alleviate the pressures this would bring to community schools budgets and the availability of pupil places?
9. Have any sites been considered for the development of Academies or Free Schools and how many expressions of interest have been shown to date?
10. Thurrock now has Primary Academies. How many Primary schools have shown an interest in becoming Academies in Havering?
11. The debate around Free Schools is increasing intensity. Could the Cabinet Member confirm if representation has been made to the DFE concerning the free for all that will develop when Academies and Free Schools determine admission numbers, the lack of cohesion Academies and Free Schools bring to borough standards of education and if representation has been made to Ministers over the pressures the new housing policy is having on school admission numbers?
12. Any growth of shrinkage of schools becomes a hot potato for parents and residents. Would the Cabinet member agree to the Children & Learning Overview & Scrutiny Committee supporting this process before decisions are taken and could we have a reassurance that the relevant ward Councillors are briefed on any proposals in their area.

Officers advised the committee that the document approved by the Cabinet was the draft Strategy which would be circulated for consultation.

In response to questions from the Committee officers advised that the rationale behind the strategy relied not just on an increase in birth-rate but did take into account new housing developments and the effects of inward migration amongst other factors. The tools now available to undertake the projections were much more sophisticated than those used in the past.  To mitigate the risk the strategy was looking to increase the number of classes which would be available and this included a plan for a 10% flex across the authority.

Officers also advised the Committee that in previous years some schools had had extra places and some 7% of accommodation had been mothballed. Now all schools were at or near capacity.

The Committee expressed some concern that the timescales were extremely tight. Officers assured them that as some of the accommodation was currently mothballed, the delay was shorter than for new build. However, even with new build the Council was proposing a modular building process similar to what is happening at Branfil School.

In response to a question from the Committee, the Executive Member for Children & Learning agreed that all affected Ward Councillors would be advised which schools were earmarked for expansion as soon as he was notified.

The Committee discussed the issue of Free Schools and Academies. Officers informed the Committee that schools considering applying for academy status did not have to notify the Authority of their intentions in advance, and the decision as to whether to approve the creation of a Free School in the borough rested with the Department of Education. The Council did need to have prior knowledge to enable them to plan properly.

The Committee were concerned that the changes to funding would adversely affect schools in the short-term. Officers informed the Committee that the School Funding Forum had anticipated the problem and had set aside funds to tackle this issue. Discussions had also been held with the local diocese to ensure their expansion plans were taken into account.

The Committee considered the officers’ and Executive Member’s responses to the reasons for the requisition:

1. Some of the schools tentatively identified for expansion have buildings which have been mothballed.
2. There may be some impact on home to school travel but this had not yet been considered, and until those schools scheduled for expansion had been identified it would be too early to look at this area.
3. Officers had explained that the Schools Funding Forum was addressing this issue.
4. The draft strategy had been prepared taking into account birth-rate, inward migration and new developments.
5. Officers agreed to look at the relevant sentence of the report before the strategy was finalised.
6. Officers advised the Committee that the government were requiring local authorities to carry out these school feasibility studies, but only for Community Schools.
7. The Committee noted that officers were utilising more sophisticated tools to assist in their predictions of future growth.
8. Officers advised the Committee that Academies were free to set their own admission numbers. They had to inform the Council when they had made their decision but did not need to consult before they made a decision. The Chairman indicated that Head Teachers continued to talk to each other and information did filter through to officers.
9. The Committee were informed that officers were aware that there was some interest in establishing Free Schools in the borough but these decisions would be taken by the Department of Education.
10. Similarly decisions by Primary Schools to apply for Academy status rested with the Department of Education, not the Local Authority. The Committee were informed that at least one primary school was considering applying for Academy status.
11. Officers informed the Committee that the Council were lobbying ministers on the issues raised in the requisition.
12. The Cabinet Member stated that there would be no pre-decision scrutiny but he would ensure that the relevant ward councillors were informed as soon as he had the information.

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.