Agenda item

An issues paper prepared by the Opposition Group is attached for the consideration of Council.

The Constitution Procedure Rules relating to Opposition Business are attached for information.

Prior to consideration of this item, John Austin (Assistant Director Corporate Governance) read out a statement in relation to conduct of the debate.  Members were advised that the Opposition Business Paper had included reference to a compliance issue relating to sensitive personal data. This matter was the subject of potential legal proceedings and had also been referred to the Police & Information Commissioner for investigation.  Given the ongoing investigations, it was felt that any debate on the issue would be premature at this stage.  There was also a need to avoid prejudicing the outcome of these investigations and any subsequent legal proceedings and as a result the Opposition Group was asked to consider withdrawing and not referring to this element of Opposition Business during the debate.

Councillor Rye (responding as lead member on the Opposition Business) advised that as he had not had an opportunity to consider the statement and consult with the Leader of the Opposition in advance of the meeting the Opposition would not be prepared to withdraw the item.  On the basis of the advice provided they would, however, refrain from referring to it in the debate.  This approach was supported by Councillor Lavender (Leader of the Opposition Group).

Councillor Rye proceeded to introduce the issues paper, prepared by the Conservative Group.

·              The purpose of the Opposition Business was to highlight a number of areas on which it was recommended that a full report should be prepared for consideration by Overview and Scrutiny Committee and then full Council setting out what actions were being taken to address concerns highlighted around the following issues:  examination results, lack of nursery, primary and secondary school places and proposals to address the shortfall; compliance issues in relation to sensitive personal data; lack of support to aspiring organisations that wished to create free schools and the performance of the school letting service.

·              The Opposition Group were keen to congratulate schools and pupils for the exam results that they had achieved, whilst recognising the challenge facing many schools at Key Stage 1 and 2, with some schools having a pupil turnover of over 50%.  Despite this, however, it was felt that children at the primary level were generally achieving well with a high proportion achieving Level 5 or above at Key Stage 2 in English and Maths and achieving 2 levels of progress.

·              At secondary level performance was much more of a concern.  Even taking account of the recent Ofqual decision on GCSE English grades, which it was recognised had had an unfair impact on English results, the achievement levels at Key Stages 3, 4 and 5 were felt to be disappointing.  At Key Stage 4 only 6 of the 18 secondary schools and academies in Enfield (33.3%) had achieved a percentage of pupils gaining 5 A*-C grades, including English and Maths that met, or was above the Fisher, Family Trust (FFT) D estimate.  5 of the 18 schools (27.8%) had met or exceeded the FFT D estimate for making 3 levels of progress in English and 8 of the 18 schools (44.4%) had met or exceeded the estimate for Maths.  As a result the Opposition Group felt there was a need to look at the actions being taken under the Council’s School Improvement Programme to address these concerns and improve the quality of education at secondary level.

·              Concerns were also highlighted in relation to the action being taken to address the difficulties being experienced in relation to the provision of school places.  Whilst the Council’s Primary Expansion Programme was seen as a way forward the Opposition Group felt that the Council should be doing much more to support and encourage the setting up of free schools and academies.  Concerns were also highlighted at the failure to consider use of sites being disposed of by the Council, such as Carterhatch Depot and Southgate Town Hall, for direct educational provision and at the way in which these processes had been managed, which in the case of Caterhatch Depot had been subject to a separate call-in.

·              Concerns were also raised over what the Opposition Group regarded as systemic failings in management of the School Lettings Service, particularly in relation to the issuing of invoices and collection of income for schools.

The Opposition Group felt that a full review of the issues raised needed to be undertaken with a report on the outcome and way forward being provided for consideration by Overview & Scrutiny Committee, prior to Council.

Councillor Ayfer Orhan, Cabinet Member for Children and Young People, responded on behalf of the Majority Group, highlighting:

·              what was felt to be the negative nature of the Opposition Business Paper and disappointment at its failure to focus on the creation of a future strategy and vision to improve the quality of education in the Borough.

·              The Administrations commitment towards an inclusive education agenda and vision where all children and young people in Enfield should be able to do as well as they can, irrespective of their background and status.

·              Delivery of the vision was recognised as a challenge in current circumstances and had been made even more difficult by the changes made by Ofqual to grade boundaries in the marking of this year’s English GCSE exams.  Given the high level of concern, Enfield was part of a consortium including other local authorities, professional bodies, schools, and individuals seeking to challenging the process, via Judicial Review.  In relation to school performance, strategies were already in place to drive improvement which included support around implementation of the new modular examination system and changes in grading boundaries.  It was pointed out that if the late change in these boundaries had not been implemented, Enfield’s achievement in relation to performance against the Fisher Family Trust Level D base rating would have been much higher.

·              As regards school places, confirmation was provided that there was no shortage of nursery places.  Shortfalls had been experienced in relation to Primary School Places but the Council had developed a robust strategy to address the rising demand for primary places.  This was based around a Primary Expansion Programme (PEP) designed to provide an additional 2,400 permanent high quality primary places at local schools.  In terms of reference to use of Carterhatch Depot, members were reminded that this was not currently an empty or vacant site. When the site had been vacated the receipts from its disposal would be used to contribute towards the capital funding required to deliver the PEP.  In addition Southgate Town Hall was not felt to be an appropriate venue for the provision of educational facilities in view of the space limitations on the site and other potential safeguarding reasons.

·              In response to concerns about support for the establishment of free schools and academies, a recent survey carried out by the Greater London Authority, listed Enfield as a borough with one of the highest number of free schools.

Other issues highlighted during the debate were as follows:

·              The concerns raised in relation to the Schools Letting Service had first been highlighted in July and despite an assurance being provided in September that the matter would be resolved, problems were still being experienced despite Service Level Agreements being in place.  Delays in the collection and payment of monies were affecting school budgets with it being reported that one school was currently owed £90,000.  In response to these concerns the Deputy Leader assured members at the meeting, that all payments due via the Schools Letting Service, would be made by the end of the month.

·              The cross party support towards delivering improvements in education attainment.

·              The need to recognise that improving educational standards and school performance was not only related to attainment or leadership and teaching but was also heavily influenced by socio economic factors such as child poverty.  In addition there was a need to consider educational policy in its widest sense, including changes in the applied curriculum, to ensure that young people were being equipped with the right skills.

·              Looking at current levels of performance the results being achieved at academies and free schools were not felt to be much better than those at local authority schools.  The current Administration would be willing to work with academies and free schools but this would be on the basis that the necessary structures and arrangements were in place in order to provide facilities that were fit for purpose and where possible this was linked to the local authority for support.

·              The need to address the fact that educational standards in the UK appeared to be falling behind improvements in educational standards in competing nations.

·              The ideological differences between members from both Groups in relation to the creation of academies and free schools as a means of delivering improvements in educational standards and attainment and their cost. 

·              The need to ensure that a more joined up and holistic approach was adopted in terms of the action being taken to deliver improved standards in schools and the identification and use of resources to support this process.

·              The need to recognise the impact that the late change in exam grade boundaries by Ofqual had had on GCSE results across the borough and support for the challenge being made to the process as a result.

·              Whilst supportive of measures being taken to increase the provision of Primary School places, concerns were raised about the impact on existing schools where space and facilities were being used as a means of providing additional places.

Councillor Rye summed up on behalf of the Opposition Group.  Whilst there were elements relating to the improvement of educational standards that both Groups supported, the Opposition Group felt that the Council should be doing more to support the establishment of free schools and academies in the borough.  Concerns remained in respect of the provision of school places, especially at primary level as there were currently 178 primary school children unplaced.  Whilst supporting the concerns highlighted in relation to the impact of the changes made by OFQUAL on the English GCSE exam grade boundaries, there was still a need to recognise and address the concerns highlighted around overall exam performance at secondary level within the borough and in relation to the Schools Letting Service.  For these reasons it was felt appropriate to seek a detailed report for consideration at Overview & Scrutiny Committee.

In response to the debate and recommendations made within the Opposition Business paper, Councillor Doug Taylor (Leader of Council) highlighted that action was already being taken to expand the number of primary school places and to improve pupil performance.  While the Administration had some reservations about the use of free schools and academies, they were willing to work with the Government policy on the issue and with free schools and academies.  In addition he pointed out that the Children’s Services Scrutiny Panel was already working to scrutinise work being undertaken to raise pupil attainment within the borough.  He felt this, alongside the usual Cabinet and Council process, meant that the necessary democratic arrangements were already in place to consider these issues, without the need for further debate at the Overview and Scrutiny Committee.  The Majority Group were not therefore minded to support the recommendation within the Opposition Business Paper.

As an outcome of the debate no request was made by the Leader of the Opposition for a vote to be taken on the recommendation within the Opposition Business Paper.