Agenda item

Report of the Corporate Director of Children and Families

The Committee received a report of the Corporate Director of Children and Families which set out a summary of the school expansion programme, with particular reference to the funding of the programme and to the consultations undertaken.  The Chair welcomed the Portfolio Holder for Children, Schools and Families, the Corporate Director of Children and Families and officers from her team to the meeting and outlined the background to the programme.

The Corporate Director stated that the expansion programme was challenging and that the Council had a statutory duty to provide school places.  To date, places had been provided for all children in Harrow but she recognised that aspects of the programme may be difficult for residents.

Members of the Committee expressed concern at the apparent lack of response to some residents’ questions.  Members then asked questions and made comments as follows:

·                     A Member questioned the capacity of the programme and what would happen if a planning application submitted by a school was refused or if the Planning Committee placed a financial contingency requirement on the permission.  An officer advised that the report before Members was the first phase of the primary expansion programme and that Cabinet had recently received reports on the future phases.  Each future phase would require further expansion and the ability to accommodate bulge classes.  The Corporate Director stated that, as with any large programme, contingency was built in.  Capacity had also been built into the programme and bulge classes had been included in phase 2.

·                     A Member stated that it appeared that the consultation undertaken had been unsatisfactory and referred to the Statement of Involvement considered at a recent meeting of the Local Development Framework Panel.  It appeared that a number of residents’ questions remained unanswered although he acknowledged that residents were not going to be pleased if the Council built next door to their property.  An officer responded that planning colleagues had provided advice on resident engagement.  He added that Vaughan School was the only school that had requested an additional meeting and he apologised if there remained some unanswered questions.  Officers gave an undertaking that those answers would be provided to those residents with a copy circulated to Members of the Committee.

·                     In terms of the extra funding provided, a Member stated that there was still a gap of £3.8 million and sought clarification on the contingency available.  An officer advised that the original intention in terms of the Capital Programme had been to use section 106 receipts to provide contingency in the short to medium term.  Since the approval of the Capital Programme in February 2012 additional funding had been received and officers were discussing further funding with the Department for Education.

·                     A Member challenged officers in terms of the rebuilding of Marlborough and Vaughan Schools, the 2 schools that most needed work, using Council resources, stating that unless a guarantee was received from Department for Education (DfE) that the grant would be received all building works should be halted.  She expressed concern that by fulfilling the need, that is the completion of building works, using Council resources, the need for the grant would be removed. Residents had been advised that the building works to Vaughan School would commence in March and if the DfE had still not made a decision in terms of grant, the Council would be committed to paying contractors.  In her view, building work should not commence until the outcome of the grant application was known and she sought clarification on the level of compensation that would be payable to the builders in the event that the works did nor proceed.

The Corporate Director acknowledged the points made but stated that this had to be balanced with the statutory requirement to provide school places.  She undertook to take advice from London Councils on this issue but added that planning permissions would still be required for expansions.  The deadline date in terms of receiving a decision on the DfE grant was 28 February in order to allow sufficient time for the works to be completed by September.  In terms of compensation, an officer advised that there was a framework agreement with Keepmoat and they were instructed in phases but that at the present time £250,000 would be payable.  The builders were geared up to commence work as required.

·                     In response to a Member’s question in relation to the 2 planning applications from schools due for consideration by the Planning Committee the following evening, an officer confirmed that these were definitive plans for the projects.

·                     A Member questioned whether the Council was considering building additional schools and, if so, what projections were being used.  The Corporate Director clarified that the Council no longer received funding for new schools but advised that there may be interest in the development of a free school on the Kodak site.  In relation to this aspect, work was being done with the West London Alliance to see if sponsorship could be attracted.  An officer added that work was being done to increase the number of school places available and a series of projections had been used.  Proposers of free schools had difficulty in finding suitable sites in Harrow.

RESOLVED:  That the report be noted and that answers to residents unanswered questions would be provided to those residents with a copy circulated to Members of the Committee.