BATH AND NORTH EAST SOMERSET COUNCIL
MINUTES OF COUNCIL MEETING
Thursday 27th March 2008
PRESENT: Councillors: Rob Appleyard, Colin Barrett, Gabriel Batt, Cherry Beath, David Bellotti, Sarah Bevan, Loraine Morgan-Brinkhurst, Neil Butters, Bryan Chalker, Victor Clarke, Nicholas Coombes, Paul Crossley, Gerry Curran, Sally Davis, Douglas Deacon, Ian Dewey, David Dixon, Peter Edwards, Andrew Furse, Terry Gazzard, Charles Gerrish, Ian Gilchrist, Francine Haeberling, Alan Hale, Malcolm Hanney, Nathan Hartley, David Hawkins, Steve Hedges, Lynda Hedges, Adrian Inker, Eleanor Jackson, Malcolm Lees, Marie Longstaff, Richard Maybury, Barry Macrae, Shaun McGall, Marian McNeir, Bryan Organ, Vic Pritchard, Caroline Roberts, Nigel Roberts, Dine Romero, Will Sandry, Brian Simmons, David Speirs, Shirley Steel, Roger Symonds, Martin Veal, Tim Warren, Chris Watt, Brook Whelan, John Whittock, Stephen Willcox and Gordon Wood
Apologies for absence: Councillors Sharon Ball, Tim Ball, John Bull, Anthony Clarke, Chris Cray, Colin Darracott, Armand Edwards, Allan Hall, Les Kew, Carol Paradise and Brian Webber
61 EMERGENCY EVACUATION PROCEDURE
The Chairman drew attention to the emergency evacuation procedure as set out on the Agenda.
62 DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
The Solicitor to the Council advised orally on the declaration of interests in relation to issues arising from the secondary schools review. He reminded Members that he had circulated a briefing note to all Councillors on this issue and that Councillors with children at schools under review would only have a personal interest in the matter if they themselves were directly affected more than the majority of other Ward residents or parents. If under those circumstances a Councillor concluded that he or she had a personal interest then he/she should consider whether or not their interest was also prejudicial.
Interests were declared by Councillors as shown below.
Councillor Sarah Bevan - Personal non-prejudicial interests as the governor of a primary school in Bath and North East Somerset and the parent of a child at primary school who will be of secondary school age within the relevant timescale under the secondary schools review (report 7 minute 66).
Councillor Gerry Curran - Personal non-prejudicial interests as Chair of Governors of Culverhay School and appointed to the Governing Body by the LEA and as the parent of children at primary school who will be of secondary school age within the relevant timescale under the secondary schools review (report 7 minute 66).
Councillor David Dixon - Personal non-prejudicial interest as a governor of St Gregory`s Catholic College under the secondary schools review (report 7 minute 66).
Councillor Eleanor Jackson - Personal non-prejudicial interests as a lay minister of the Church of England in the position of faith schools; as a governor of Trinity Church of England Primary School and St Nicholas Church of England Primary School in the future of Writhlington School under the secondary schools review (report 7 minute 66).
Councillor Marie Longstaff - Personal non-prejudicial interest as a governor of Wellsway School under the secondary schools review (report 7 minute 66).
Councillor Dine Romero - Personal non-prejudicial interest as the parent of a child at secondary school under the secondary schools review (report 7 minute 66).
Councillor Shirley Steel - Personal non-prejudicial interest as a governor of Somervale School under the secondary schools review (report 7 minute 66).
Councillor Tim Warren - Personal non-prejudicial interest as the parent of a child at secondary school under the secondary schools review (report 7 minute 66).
Councillor Brook Whelan - Personal non-prejudicial interest as a governor of Hayesfield School under the secondary schools review (report 7 minute 66).
Councillor John Whittock - Personal non-prejudicial interest as a director of the Norton Radstock Regeneration Company appointed by the Council in the public submission on the former site of the Radstock War Memorial (minute 65).
63 ANNOUNCEMENTS FROM THE CHAIRMAN OF THE COUNCIL OR FROM THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE
The Chairman:
(1) Welcomed the members of the public to the meeting and reminded all present that the purpose of agenda item 7 was to enable the Full Council to put forward a view to Cabinet on the proposals for reorganising secondary schools. No decisions would be taken at this meeting. The views put forward would be considered at the Cabinet Meeting on 14th May. That meeting would be asked to consider the issues and make decisions on the proposals.
(2) Indicated that he proposed to continue the practice of allowing Councillors seconding a motion to reserve their right to speak.
(3) Invited all Councillors to join him for light refreshments in the Chairman`s Room after the meeting.
64 TO ANNOUNCE ANY URGENT BUSINESS AGREED BY THE CHAIR(PERSON)
The Chairman announced that he agreed that the meeting should consider an urgent report on the review of the decision making and governance framework in respect of claims related to the Bath Spa.
The Chairman had concluded that, because this matter needed to be considered urgently by the Council to avoid any delay in refining the appropriate mechanisms which could prejudice the Council's position, it was reasonable for the matter to be dealt with at this meeting. In reaching his decision he had regard to the comprehensive and self-explanatory nature of the report now circulated and the fact that all Members had the opportunity of receiving a confidential briefing on the current position on the Spa claims at briefing sessions held yesterday and today and that further briefings were planned in the near future to give all Councillors the opportunity to attend.
The Chairman indicated that the meeting would consider the urgent business item after the secondary schools review.
65 PETITIONS, STATEMENTS, DEPUTATIONS AND QUESTIONS FROM THE PUBLIC
(A) Ms Amanda Leon made a statement in support of a petition with 228 signatures calling on the Council to relinquish its claim to ownership of the former site, between the Victoria Hall and the Post Office, of the Radstock War Memorial. In response to a question from Councillor Crossley Ms Leon indicated that the Radstock Action Group was contacting the Land Registry to challenge the Council`s claim. The Council thanked Ms Leon for her statement and received and noted the petition which was referred for consideration and response to the Cabinet Member for Resources.
(B) Mrs Maureen Bollard, Director of Education for the Diocese of Bath and Wells, made a statement endorsing the vision and integrated planning for the future of secondary education across the Authority`s area which was evident in the report and accompanying papers under consideration at this meeting. She also stated the commitment of the Church of England Diocese to offering inclusive educational opportunities for all students and to work in partnership with other groups in the education sector. Mrs Bollard was thanked for her statement which was received and noted and referred for consideration by the Council as part of agenda item 7.
(C) Ms Cheryl Pope, Head Teacher of St Mark`s School, Bath made a statement supporting the proposal to create an 11 to 18 Church of England school north of the river in Bath and urging that investigations take place to identify a suitable new site accessible to students across the whole catchment area. She urged the Council to recognise the success which the School had achieved in across the curriculum, its openness and success in encouraging innovation, its popularity with students and its strong links with the local community. Ms Pope was thanked for her statement which was received and noted and referred for consideration by the Council as part of agenda item 7.
(D) Mr Mike Roy, Chair of Governors of Oldfield School, Bath made a statement urging the Council to develop and build on the success of Oldfield School and not close it. He indicated that the School would be happy to go co-educational over time and this had been their position since the Head Teacher met the Overview and Scrutiny Panel in November 2005. In response to a question from Councillor Chris Watt, Mr Roy said his understanding was that the letter sent by the Head Teacher to the LEA on 28 January 2008 indicating that the School saw no point in meeting officers to discuss co-educational options referred to the current financial constraints on accommodation and facilities. Mr Roy said that he was sure that these were matters for negotiation which as far as the School was concerned could be resolved over time. Mr Roy was thanked for his statement which was received and noted and referred for consideration by the Council as part of agenda item 7.
(E) Mr Colin Piper made a statement on behalf of the teaching and non-teaching staff at Broadlands School, Keynsham and presented a petition with 107 signatures urging the Council to recognise the success which the School had achieved in maintaining and improving excellent standards across the curriculum, its popularity with parents and its strong links with the local community. Mr Piper was thanked for his statement which was received and noted and referred for consideration by the Council as part of agenda item 7.
66 A REVIEW OF SECONDARY SCHOOLS IN BATH AND NORTH EAST SOMERSET (Report 7)
The Council considered a report on the future of secondary education in Bath and North East Somerset which outlined the findings of the Overview and Scrutiny Panel`s review published in 2007 and the work done since that review and asked the Council to contribute observations on the specific proposals in the report for consideration at the Cabinet Meeting on 14th May 2008.
Councillor Chris Watt, in moving the motion, paid tribute to the work done by the Children and Young People`s O&S Panel and its predecessor the Education, Youth, Culture and Leisure O&S Panel and thanked the officer team for their comprehensive work over the past two years. He outlined the background to the review and the decisions which the Council needed to address to ensure that the best quality secondary education would continue to be available across the area. He informed the Council that thirty enquiries had been received by Children's Services officers from parents asking questions or expressing concern about how the review would affect the future of individual schools and all except one of them had been satisfactorily resolved. He urged anyone wishing to contribute their views to the process to get in touch with him or the officers between now and the Cabinet Meeting on 14th May.
Councillor Richard Maybury expressed his support for the views set out by Miss Cheryl Pope on the excellence of St. Marks School. He emphasisied that the School`s academic success had increased significantly. The School headed the list of Bath schools for added value on academic success. It had also achieved many examples of sporting success. St Mark`s was an exciting school with a buzz and during his recent visit it was evident that the pupils there genuinely enjoyed their learning and development. He said that when he was shown around the school he had changed his personal perception. He would support the proposed new Church of England school in the north of Bath as long as it achieved the same high standard as St Mark`s.
Councillor Paul Crossley said that all our schools did a fantastic job. He thanked the Cabinet for giving the Full Council this opportunity to comment on the options before the decision was taken as to which proposals would be brought forward for consultation and implementation. He also paid tribute to the work done by the O&S Panels and the officer team during the course of the review to date. He said that the Liberal Democrat Group wanted every child in the LEA area to have the opportunity to attend a good local school. There must be wide, open, honest consultation with all interested parties including neighbouring LEAs. His Group wished to see sustainable travel policies developed and did not support academy schools. Councillor Crossley said that he wished the Cabinet to be more open about the plans for the Norton Radstock area as some parents did not wish the existing concentration of schools in that area to continue but to be spread more evenly across the south and west of the Council`s area. The future needs of secondary education in Keynsham had to be carefully addressed because of the requirements of the Regional Spatial Strategy for the volume of new housing to be built. In Bath Ralph Allen School and St. Gregory`s College had infrastructure needs which should not be overlooked. Beechen Cliff School and Hayesfield School must have inclusive admission policies. The Liberal Democrat Group considered that more justification was required to demonstrate the need for only one secondary school in the north of Bath in view of the expansion of new homes in the area. They wished the Cabinet to consider how best to work with Oldfield School on becoming co-educational. It was essential that there is open honest consultation on all the sites that are being considered as part of these proposals.
Councillor Charles Gerrish said that there were two exceptionally good schools in Keynsham and he considered it to be of the utmost importance that the strengths of both were recognised in any changes made. He said that all children in Keynsham and Saltford must have the opportunity to be educated in Keynsham and sufficient school provision made to take into account the new house building. He also wished to see good opportunities for physical exercise in wide and spacious playing fields retained on all school sites and shared as widely as possible with the local community to maximise their use.
Councillor David Speirs thanked the officer team who had supported the O/S Panels in their review and Councillor Watt for giving the Council this opportunity to debate the issues. He said that Bath and North East Somerset schools were among the best in the country and that the Government's Building Schools for the Future Programme would enhance our schools even more. There were three 3 issues of particular importance: on school transport the reccommendations of the O&S Panel on sustainable school transport needed to be considered as part of this review process; on the future of Broadlands School and Wellsway School it was essential that the skills base of the staff in those Schools was retained; investment in schools in the Norton Radstock area had demonstrated excellent results and must continue.
Councillor Alan Hale said he wished the Cabinet Member to give an assurance that the future of the teaching support staff in all the schools affected will be properly considered.
Councillor Adrian Inker said that the Labour Group accepted that there were difficult decisions to be made to secure the future of education in the area and that no outcome will be universally popular. He endorsed the comments already made by other Councillors on the excellent achievement of Bath and North East Somerset schools especially the two excellent secondary schools in Keynsham. He considered that clarification was needed as soon as possible in the course of this review as to whether in Keynsham the proposals involved a merger of the two secondary schools on a single site or the closure of one of them. The future of the unit for pupils with visual impairments at Broadlands was critical. It was important not to lose the benefits of B6 and the partnership with Norton Radstock College. The expected exceptional growth in housing in Keynsham within the next 4 to 5 years needed to be fully considered and taken into account.
Councillor Gerry Curran referred to his involvement as a governor of Culverhay School for the past eight years and said that he was aware that the issues being addressed in the review about the provision of co-educational secondary education in Bath had been under discussion for over twenty years. He recalled a discussion to the Education Secretary of State Estelle Morris seven or eight years ago to put the case for resources to be allocated to resolve some of these issues. Culverhay School has been thwarted in its desire to become co-educational because of the current imbalance in provision in Bath. Culverhay School has a fantastic achievement record and it is now among the top forty improving schools in the country. It has accepted an offer from the LEA for capital works to enable the School to become co-educational.
Councillor Martin Veal asked whether, if a new Church of England secondary school was established in the north of Bath and not on the St. Mark's School site, the Diocese of Bath and Wells would commit the proceeds from the sale of the St Mark`s site to education development and would they do likewise if other CoE school sites were sold.
Councillor Eleanor Jackson said that as a governor of Trinity Primary School in Radstock she was pleased that it now featured as a selling point in house adverts to be within the School`s catchment area. The aim of education was to enable all children to achieve their academic, social and spiritual potential. As a lay minister in the Church of England she was pleased to see that the principle of a secondary CoE in Bath has been retained in the review proposals.
Councillor Caroline Roberts said that she and Councillor Loraine Morgan-Brinkhurst as the local Councillors for the Ward including Oldfield School had received dozens of emails since 18th March when the report was published that expressed concern about the proposals concerning the future of Oldfield School. They shared the deep concern about future of the School. Oldfield had a high achieving reputation and it had many excellent new facilities such as its dance studio. There was evident confusion and distress about the decision making process which was not helped by the fact that this report had been published the day after the closing date for school admission applications. She considered that parents had not been adequately informed of what transition arrangements would be in place. There was an urgent need to engage with parents and all sections of the education community on the proposals. Travel to school was a critical issue across the whole of Bath and the location of Oldfield School enabled many pupils to walk there. There needed to be consultation on the proposals with South Gloucestershire and Bristol City LEAs.
Councillor Marian McNeir said that school changes were always terribly worrying for parents of current and prospective pupils. Schools had worked incredible hard to achieve and maintain a good reputation and parents were so committed to their children`s school. The Council must be sensitive to that in progressing this review. Open, wide consultation was essential. Every new school must be a community hub.
Councillor David Dixon said that parents make choices of school for their children based on a number of factors including education and location considerations. If the Council builds and supports excellent schools throughout Bath the element of increasing travel to better schools across the river will be reduced thereby mitigating the school traffic and transport problems.
Councillor Nigel Roberts said that as a Council we are not always good at consultation and he hoped that on this issue we would not imitate the national consultation process on post office closures as a template. The Council needed to undertake open, honest, wide consultation which was as fair as possible and make special efforts to go out to hard to reach groups. The Cabinet should consider other services the Council provides or requires e.g. youth centres, libraries and examine the potential for using school facilities to locate them thereby making schools a true community facility. This Council inherited a substantial backlog of investment in schools because the former Avon County did not invest in schools. As part of this review the Cabinet must consider the impact of new build on the schools that are not going to be rebuilt.
Councillor Andrew Furse, in seconding the motion, said that the review was about improving life chances for young people. He believed that, in view of the latest information made available in the statement to this meeting from the Chair of Governors at Oldfield School, the Cabinet Member should rethink the decision to close Oldfield now that the School had committed itself to considering becoming co-educational. It is in the best location for Newbridge and Weston children. The Cabinet Member needed to give options for its future other than closure. Councillor Furse urged that more funding be made available now to enable Oldfield and Culverhay Schools to move towards co-educational facilities without further delay. That would solve the problem of the unequal distribution of co-educational facilities throughout Bath. It was essential that this review delivered a workable travel to school policy across Bath and North East Somerset. This review must be based on wide and fair consultation and secure fair and equitable admissions policies implemented in all schools in the area.
Councillor Chris Watt, in summing up at the close of the debate, thanked all the Councillors who had contributed to the discussion. He agreed that it was a priority to obtain collaborative use of facilities wherever possible shared between schools and the local community. The LEA had an excellent track record in dealing with school reorganisations and there had been very few compulsory redundancies during the primary school reorganisation and he pledged that the LEA would endeavour to achive the same position during the secondary review. On the question about the use of capital receipts from the sale of school buildings owned by the Diocese of Bath and Wells Councillor Watt said that the Diocese maintained close contact with the LEA and discussions on this issue would continue with them. He invited any Councillor unhappy with the consultation to contact him about their concerns. He acknowledged that admission to new schools was a critical issue and that he had asked the O&S Panel to review admissions across Bath and North East Somerset to ensure that all schools operated an open, fair and equal access admissions policy.
On a motion from Councillor Chris Watt seconded by Councillor Andrew Furse it was RESOLVED that the Council:
(1) Thanks the Children and Young People`s Overview and Scrutiny Panel for the three area based secondary reviews which have contributed to the strategy presented today; and
(2) Asks the Cabinet when it meets to discuss the strategy to consider that work, together with the views expressed at this meeting, in order to decide whether to take forward specific proposals for consultation.
(Note: The above resolution was carried unanimously with all Councillors present voting in favour and no Councillors voting against or abstaining from voting.)
The Council considered a report on the decision-making and governance arrangements for the conduct of claims relating to the Spa project.
In response to a question from Councillor Will Sandry, the Cabinet Member for Resources and the Chief Executive clarified that, where decisions required the approval of the Leader of the Council and the Leader of the Liberal Democrat Group, if there was not unanimity then the matter would be referred to Full Council.
On a motion from Councillor Malcolm Hanney seconded by Councillor Francine Haeberling it was RESOLVED that the Council:
(1) Notes the action taken to date and the current position.
(2) Authorises the Chief Executive, with the approval of the Leader of the Council and the Leader of the Liberal Democrat Group, and following consultation with the Cabinet Member for Resources ,other Group Leaders, the Chief Financial Officer, the Monitoring Officer, the Director of Development and Major Projects and the Chair of the Corporate Performance and Resources Overview and Scrutiny Panel to:-
(a) Decide on behalf of the Council any matters relating to the Bath Spa claims.
(b) Make recommendations to Cabinet or Council as appropriate concerning the conduct of Spa claims.
(c) Approve by whatever mechanism is appropriate, the funding of expenditure considered necessary in connection with Spa claims where existing budgetary provision is inadequate and/or existing arrangements for approval do not otherwise apply; and
(d) Report back in September 2008 and February 2009 on progress in connection with the claims, including recommendations as to any future strategy.
(Note: The above resolution was carried unanimously with all Councillors present voting in favour and no Councillors voting against or abstaining from voting.)
68 PETITIONS, STATEMENTS, DEPUTATIONS AND QUESTIONS FROM COUNCILLORS
There were three questions from Members of the Council as listed in the Appendix to these minutes. The questions asked and answers given at the meeting are held on file in the minute book and published on the Council's website.
The meeting ended at 8.00pm
Chair(person)
Date Confirmed and Signed .......................
Prepared by Democratic Services