Agenda and minutes

To note the attendance at this meeting of any duly appointed Reserve Members.

Reserve Members may attend meetings:-

(i)                 to take the place of an ordinary Member for whom they are a reserve;

(ii)               where the ordinary Member will be absent for the whole of the meeting; and

(iii)             after notifying the Chair at the start of the meeting.

RESOLVED:  To note the attendance at this meeting of the following duly appointed Reserve Member:-

To receive declarations of personal or prejudicial interests, arising from business to be transacted at this meeting, from all Members present.

Reverend P Reece, the Church of England representative, informed the Committee that he was a Governor at St John’s Middle School and the Chair of Governors at St John’s First School, and that he would therefore abstain from voting on the statutory proposal at agenda item 8.  It was also clarified that Mr Geoff Edwards was in attendance at the meeting to present the proposal to the Committee and not in his capacity as a Reserve representative of the Church of England.

RESOLVED: To note that the following interests were declared:

To consider whether any of the items listed on the agenda should be considered with the press and public excluded on the grounds that it is thought likely, in view of the nature of the business to be transacted, that there would be disclosure of confidential information in breach of an obligation of confidence or of exempt information as defined in the Local Government (Access to Information) Act 1985.

RESOLVED:  That all items be considered with the press and public present.

That the minutes of the meeting held on 2 November 2004, having been circulated, be taken as read and signed as a correct record.

RESOLVED:  That the minutes of the meeting held on 2 November 2004, having been circulated, be taken as read and signed as a correct record.

To receive questions (if any) from local residents or organisations under the provisions of Committee Procedure Rule 15 (Part 4B of the Constitution).

RESOLVED:  To note that no public questions were put at this meeting under the provisions of Committee Procedure Rule 18.

To receive petitions (if any) submitted by members of the public/Councillors under the provisions of Committee Procedure Rule 15 (Part 4B of the Constitution).

RESOLVED:  To note that no petitions were received at this meeting under the provisions of Committee Procedure Rule 15.

To receive deputations (if any) under the provisions of Committee Procedure Rule 16 (Part 4B of the Constitution).

RESOLVED:  To note that no deputations were received at the meeting under the provisions of Committee Procedure Rule 16.

The Committee received a report of the London Diocesan Board for Schools (LDBS) and the Governors of St John’s First School and St John’s Middle School, which detailed a proposal to amalgamate the two schools.

The Chair welcomed Members of the Committee and public to the meeting.  Whilst being aware of the Committee’s procedures, the Chair stressed the importance of allowing all interested parties an opportunity to express their views.  Therefore it was proposed that the two objectors would have an opportunity to ask questions or clarify issues during the course of the meeting with assistance from the Legal Adviser.  Members were asked to note that a number of additional papers had been tabled, including further correspondence from the objectors.

Mr Geoff Edwards of the LDBS provided the Committee with a summary of the amalgamation proposal.  It was reported that both Governing Bodies had agreed to consider amalgamation following the resignation of the Headteacher of St John’s First School in summer 2004, in accordance with the Council’s Amalgamation Policy for First and Middle Schools.  Having undertaken initial informal consultation with parents, staff and other interested parties, and considered the educational merits of the proposal, both Governing Bodies agreed to proceed with amalgamation.  Accordingly, Statutory Notices were published on 25 November 2004 allowing until 6 January 2005 for the receipt of formal objections, of which two were received.  Mr Edwards informed the Committee that both Governing Bodies together with the LDBS and the London Borough of Harrow had expressed their support for the proposal.

In response to a query regarding staffing issues, it was clarified that there would not be any redundancies as a result of the proposed amalgamation.  It was explained that if the proposal was approved the new school would have a different staffing structure to address the needs of a combined school and would have one Headteacher.  There was one substantive Headteacher and one acting Headteacher following the resignation of the First School Headteacher.  In addition, it was confirmed that the amalgamation would not result in a reduction of pupil numbers.

The Committee were advised that all parents had been invited to contribute to the consultation process through a number of meetings and a questionnaire that was part of the consultation document.  Staff and parents had also been consulted through meetings and separate ‘drop in’ surgeries.  A ‘frequently asked questions’ leaflet had been issued to staff and the teaching unions had also been included in the consultation process.

The resource implications of the proposed amalgamation were discussed.  It was reported that the Governors had worked with LEA officers in respect of an indicative budget and were assured that, on amalgamation, there would not be a loss of funding because the LMS Formula would provide a new and appropriate budget for a combined school.  Transitional funding would be in place in accordance with the Council’s amalgamation policy. An officer also confirmed that the amalgamation would not incur a negative impact in terms of securing capital funding.

A Member  ...  view the full minutes text for item 74.