Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill

Written evidence submitted by The Parent Support Group to The Children’s Wellbeing and Schools Bill Committee (CWSB265) .

The Parent Support Group represents the interests of some 500 families located in Brighton and Hove. We advocate for a transparent, evidence-led approach to improving educational outcomes in the city and for the rights of children to attend their local community schools.

Executive Summary

● Brighton and Hove City Council has submitted evidence on the proposed Children's Wellbeing and Schools Bill, coinciding with a controversial policy proposal to change school catchment areas, alter admission priorities and reduce Published Admission Numbers (PANs) at some secondary schools.

● The council's proposed policy change could restrict parental school choice and displace pupils from their local communities.

● The council aims to reduce PANs at popular schools to redistribute children to geographically remote schools, leading to longer and more unsafe journeys for children.

● The submission to the Committee regarding changes to the Code was made without public notification during the secondary schools consultation process, raising concerns about misuse of consultation rules.

● The council seeks to alter the School Admissions Code to support contentious school reorganisation proposals that may breach the current code.

● The council's proposal undermines the effectiveness of the Admissions Code and could interfere with the powers of the Schools Adjudicator.

● The council is attempting to reduce school PANs to fit their proposals, which could result in injustice.

Reason for Submitting Evidence

1. It’s a matter of some concern that we have discovered that Brighton and Hove City Council have made a submission on the call for evidence in relation to the proposed Children and Wellbeing Bill, the time for which we see expires today at 5pm.

2. The reason for our concern is that that submission comes at a time in the context of another policy proposal the Council is proposing to vote on later this month (27th February) at Full Council, which is a controversial proposal for a change in admission priorities across the city; changes to some catchment area boundaries; and reductions in PANs at some high demand secondary schools, with a view to bolstering pupil numbers and mix at a school in Ovingdean which is remotely located and adversely affected from a falling roll. Its decline may be partially attributed to its perceived performance, however there are other factors outside of its control such as its geographic location and shifting local demographics which have compounded its challenges.

Evidence

3. The proposed policy change from the Council is:

"…All admission authorities must consult…. where they propose a decrease to the PAN. Community and voluntary controlled schools have the right to object to the Schools Adjudicator if the PAN set for them is lower than they would wish. When considering such an objection, the Schools Adjudicator must have regard to a range of factors, including parental preferences, the number of places available across the Local Authority as a whole and, specifically, in the area in which the school is located, and the potential impact on other schools if the PAN is not reduced."

4. The effect of the Council’s suggestion would be to dilute and possibly remove school choice from parents and require the Admission Code to circumvent parental preference in favour of the alternative requirement of satisfying council desires to fill places in schools where there are surplus places but no demand. Reducing PAN at popular schools in areas of high student density and attempting to reduce places further through a controversial open ballot process used for out of catchment pupil allocation into already high demand areas, will result in the displacement of pupils from their local communities in Brighton.

5. We oppose the change the Council is trying to make to the Code. In the current code the PANs follow the pupils but what the Council is proposing is to turn it the other way around – by reducing the PAN for some popular schools in more densely populated parts of the city and requiring schools, parents and pupils to manage that policy in the context of the school admission number reduction. The Council is trying to reduce school PANs to fit their proposals and budgetary preferences but the Code must be legally operational so that it also prevents the Council from introducing a measure that would result in injustice.

6. The geographic distribution of schools and children in Brighton and Hove means that the council would rather seek to reduce PANs at popular schools in populous areas and attempt to re-distribute children to geographically remote schools to keep them viable, against parental preference, than develop policies which work with the geodemographic reality of the city. In doing so, and in dismantling the principle of community schooling, many children will be forced to undertake long and unsafe journeys with attendance, well-being and attainment likely to suffer.

7. The Council is trying to immunise itself against the effect of highly controversial proposals by suggesting this amendment, whereas the Code should be an effective check against principles regarding fair admission arrangements. The Code should be sufficiently robust legally to withstand any manipulation of it which this Council hopes to do through this suggested amendment. We would ask you to ignore or not place any weight on Brighton and Hove City Council’s submission in the course of the Bill proceedings.

8. The proposal by the Council seriously undermines the effectiveness of the Admissions Code that the Adjudicator follows. What the Council is seeking to do is neuter the code as a basis for examination of some highly controversial school reorganisation proposals that it is currently consulting on that are in clear breach of the current code. The powers of the Schools Adjudicator should not be interfered with to bolster a new policy that could then thwart the fairness of the appeals process.

9. This aspect regarding changes to the Code has not featured in the secondary schools consultation process with parents so to submit evidence to the Committee without notification to the public looks like a misuse of the normative rules around consultation and the legislative process. Whilst the Council is launching a highly controversial consultation it should not be supported by these back door proposals that further aggravate a complex issue that requires other solutions and adequate scrutiny.

February 2025.