Issue - meetings

Members are asked to note that these decisions were taken between meetings as it could not reasonably be deferred to the next diarised Education Cabinet Committee meeting.  The views of the Cabinet Chairman and Group Spokesmen of the Education Cabinet Committee were consulted prior to the decision being made in accordance with the new governance arrangements.

(Verbal Update by Mr M Whiting, Cabinet Member, Education, Learning and Skills and Mr P Leeson, Corporate Director, Education, Learning and Skills)

1.               The Chairman advised the Committee that this decision had to be taken between meetings as it could not be reasonably deferred to this meeting of the Education Cabinet Committee and that his views as Chairman and the views of the Group spokesmen had been sought prior to the decision being made in accordance with the new governance arrangements. 

2.               Members were given the opportunity to make comments and ask questions which included the following:-

a)              Members welcomed the determination to have sufficient places in Reception and Year1 classes in the county.

b)              A request was made for details on the types of temporary classrooms that were available and their cost.  The Chairman agreed to this forming part of the Capital Priority Programme Report to be submitted to the next meeting of this Cabinet Committee.

3.               Mr Christie said that he did agree with the procedure for taking this decision between meetings but had concerns as to why a decision was being taking in July 2012 for places in September 2012.  He sought assurance that the permanent classrooms would not be put into popular schools that would impact on neighbouring schools where there were places available, which he did not agree with.  Mr Christie then commented on St Botolph’s, Church of England School in Northfleet that was receiving extra places which meant that the admissions arrangements that apply to the spaces being provided would be Church of England arrangements, which he did not consider was solving the problem in Northfleet as local children could not get into local schools because of the Churches insistence.  Mr Whiting explained that Kent would always look to secure places in good or outstanding schools where there was space to do so but would not look to increase a school that was in special measurers.  Care had been taken to ensure that all the schools’ availability in the area that the school that was to be expanded was taken into account.  He advised that there were continued discussion with the faith schools about admissions criteria.  He advised that his view was that there should be good local schools for local people.  There needed to be fair access for all children in every locality.

4.               Mr Leeson recognised that this was not a decision that should be made in July normally.  In publishing the draft Education Commissioning Plan a more systematic approach was being taking in planning ahead to make enough provision available for local parents to have a good choice of schools for their child.  In future the Commissioning Plan would allow decisions to be made at an earlier part of the cycle on those issues.  The decision was not just about provision of places but about giving parents reasonable diversity in their choice of good quality education.  There had been decisions made earlier on where schools have had to take  ...  view the full minutes text for item 16