Agenda item - Petitions for Council Debate

Petitions to be debated at Council.  Report of the Monitoring Officer (copy attached).

(i)West Hove Catchment Area Changes – Keep Our Community Together.  Lead petitioner Mr. Kevin O’Sullivan

50.1      The Mayor sated that where a petition secured 1,250 or more signatures it could be debated at the council meeting.  She had been made aware of two such petitions which related to the same issue and would therefore take each in turn, and noted that details of the second petition had been included in the addendum papers.   She also noted that there was an amendment to the covering report’s recommendation relating to the second petition from the Green Group.

50.2      The Mayor then invited Mr. Kevin O’Sullivan as the lead petitioner to present the first petition calling on the Council to abandon the proposals to change existing catchment areas until the Education & Skills Funding Agency had confirmed the site and the opening date for the proposed Brighton & Hove Academy.

50.3      Mr. O’Sullivan thanked that Mayor and confirmed that the petition had 1,456 signatures in the West Hove area who objected to the proposed changes to catchment areas.  He noted that Varndean, Dorothy Stringer and Blatchington Mill schools had offered to accommodate more pupils during the next two years and therefore questioned the need to review the catchment areas.  Should the proposed changes be taken forward, it was felt that they would have a detrimental affect by removing choice of schools, affect friendship groups, and result in extended travelling for a number of pupils and increased costs for parents.  He noted that the council was obliged to follow the school admission code which stated that actions had to be fair, clear and objective.  He believed that the current proposals were some way from being fair, clear and objective.  It was hoped that the council would reconsider the matter and noted that parents were considering the option of funding a judicial review to ensure the best outcome for their children.

50.4      The Mayor then invited Mr. Ollie Tait as the lead petitioner to present the second petition which also called on the Council to abandon the proposals to change existing catchment areas until the Education & Skills Funding Agency had confirmed the site and the opening date for the proposed Brighton & Hove Academy.

50.5      Mr. Tait thanked the Mayor and confirmed that the petition had 1,368 signatures from the Elm Grove area, who believed that the proposed changes were counter to the council’s aims for pupils transferring to secondary school and should not be implemented until a decision had been made on the new Academy.  The outcome of the proposed change would see pupils having to travel over 6 miles and a travel time over seventy-five minutes which would impact of studies and friendship groups.  There was also the potential impact to the nature of the area with an increase in the number of HMOs given the neighbouring universities and families being put off from moving into the area, thereby affecting the pupil numbers at the local primary schools.  Whilst the secondary schools have offered to increase their intake, the cross-party Working Group has questioned the numbers but he would suggest that the Working Group’s own figures could also be questioned.  It was recognised that previous decisions had not helped and consequences were being faced, however it was felt that until the proposed  new school opened, maintaining the existing arrangements was the least worst option.  He noted that parents were preparing for the matter to be taken to judicial review and that they has already been advised that the proposals did not meet the school admissions code and it was hoped that the council would reconsider the matter and listen to the views of those affected.

50.6      The Mayor thanked Mr. O’Sullivan and Mr. Tait for attending the meeting and presenting their petitions and called on Councillor Chapman to respond to the petitions.

50.7      Councillor Chapman thanked the petitioners for their presentations and stated that both petitions and the points raised, as well as the strength of feeling in relation to the issue would be taken into consideration by the Children, Young People & Skills Committee.  He noted that there had been similar concerns raised by members of the public at previous meetings of the committee and that the cross-party Working Group had been looking at the in-balance of secondary school places across the city.  He expected the cross-party Working Group to report to the next meeting of the CYP&S Committee in January and that a decision would then be reached.

50.8      Councillor Phillips moved the amendment to the covering report’s recommendation in relation to the second petition, ‘Keep Our Community Together’ on behalf of the Green Group.  She stated that there was a need for more action to be taken to address the difficulties encountered by parents in securing a preferred school place for their children and for a full report to come to the committee in January.  The amendment sought to ensure that necessary information on options for secondary places, population assessments and equalities impact assessments was provided so that an informed decision could be taken and parents given clarity and certainty over their children’s futures.

50.9      Councillor Gibson formally seconded the amendment and reserved his right to speak later in the debate.

50.10   Councillor Peltzer-Dunn welcomed the two petitions and presentations made by the petitioners and noted that the Chair of the Committee had given his undertaking to take all the information that comes forward into consideration when the matter came to committee.

50.11   Councillor Daniel stated that she fully supported the parents and noted that the Working Group had a difficult job in trying to enable greater certainty about school places and this had been added to with the recent offer from certain schools to expand their numbers. She felt that all councillors needed to know what the implications and impact of any expansions would mean e.g. regarding sibling links and financially for individual schools etc.  She asked that the Working Group would continue to engage with Ward councillors on the issue.

50.12   Councillor Nemeth stated that he believed the proposed changes to catchment areas were ill-conceived and noted that parents had expressed an intention to seek a judicial review of the process.  He stated that as things stood there was a likelihood of children having to pass empty school buildings at their local school having been directed to an alternative school.  He acknowledged that the schools offering to take more pupils could have made their position known earlier but now that there was capacity it should be taken up and any court action avoided.

50.13   Councillor Gibson stated that there was a need to support the parents of all those affected and to resolve the matter favourably.  It was important to engage with the schools at an early stage as this may then have prevented pupils from being directed to other schools when spaces were clearly available and would have not led to the upset and distress that has been caused for parents as clearly shown by the strength of response to the proposals to date.

50.14   Councillor Brown stated that as a member of the Working Group she wanted to thank the parents for putting forward their concerns which were being taken into consideration by the Working Group.  It was a very difficult situation for everyone concerned and there was no easy solution to the matter.  With more information coming forward there was a need to give further consideration to the potential solution and to make recommendations to the Committee and full Council in January.

50.15   Councillor Page stated that parental choice was an important factor and that needed to be accounted for in any proposals that were made; as well as the need to prevent detachment from peers and to maintain communities which were important to their local schools.  He noted that previously a number of parents had not been given any of their 3 preferred choices of schools and this needed to be avoided in the future.  An offer had been made by some schools and this should be taken up to ensure that pupils could attend schools of their choice.

50.16   Councillor Chapman thanked everyone for their contributions and stated that he wished to reassure councillors and parents that all the views and information provided would be taken into consideration for the report to the Committee in January.  He also stated that he did not feel that the Green Group’s amendment added anything to the process as the actions would be part of the overall formulation of the report and therefore could not accept it.

50.17   The Mayor noted it was recommended to refer the first petition to the next meeting of the Children, Young People & Skills Committee and therefore put the recommendation to the vote which was carried unanimously.

50.18   RESOLVED: That the petition be noted and referred to the Children, Young People & Skills Committee for consideration at its meeting on the 15^th January 2018.

50.19   The Mayor then noted that an amendment to the recommendation referring the second petition to the next meeting of the Children, Young People and Skills Committee had been moved.  She also noted that a request for a recorded vote had been made and was supported by a sufficient number of councillors and therefore put it to the vote as detailed below:

50.20   The Mayor confirmed that the amendment had been lost by 17 votes to 36 and therefore put the recommendation as listed in the covering report to the vote which was carried unanimously.

50.21   RESOLVED: That the petition be noted and referred to the Children, Young People & Skills Committee for consideration at its meeting on the 15^th January 2018.