Agenda item

This report sets out the public questions received for this meeting. 

(A)       Miss K Mason of Rochester asked the Portfolio Holder for Children’s Services, Councillor Wicks, the following question:

 

Where and when is the proposed school to be built in the Rochester and Chatham area and what is the proposed catchment area?

 

The Portfolio Holder for Children’s Services, Councillor Wicks responded by thanking Miss Mason for her question. He stated that plans were at a very early stage and in line with government policy any new provision would need to be established as an Academy or a Free School. The Council would first seek expressions of interest to run the new provision, which would include the need to identify a site and set a timetable for completion.

 

Miss Mason asked a supplementary question asking whether Medway Council could publish a list of all organisations and stakeholders that were consulted in preparation of the new School Organisation Plan and who would be consulted on new plans?

 

In response, Councillor Wicks advised that the School Organisation Plan was already out for consultation and he would expect all those who needed to be consulted to respond. He confirmed that all those who needed to be consulted were included in the consultation process as required by law.

 

(B)       Miss K Green of Gillingham asked the Portfolio Holder for Children’s Services, Councillor Wicks, the following question:

 

Does Medway Council have any future plans to close St. Peter’s?

 

The Portfolio Holder for Children’s Services, Councillor Wicks confirmed that there were no future plans to close St Peter’s.

 

Miss Green asked a supplementary question by querying whetherMedway Council valued the contributions of small schools within their local communities?

 

Councillor Wicks confirmed that Medway Council values all its schools and all the input that comes from the heads and the governors and the staff and indeed parents as well. Therefore he was able to confirm that the Council values the contributions of everybody.

 

(C)       Mrs B Franqueira of Rochester asked the Portfolio Holder for Children’s Services, Councillor Wicks, the following question:

 

18 months ago, council officers were predicting a decline in birth rate numbers. Now they are saying there is a rise. Were they wrong then or are they wrong now?

 

The Portfolio Holder for Children’s Services, Councillor Wicks thanked Mrs Franqueira for her question and confirmed that no predictions were made about the future levels of births as the Council used the actual birth rate and not predictions to forecast the demands for school places. He advised that Officers did not predict a decline in the number of births.

 

            Mrs Franqueira then asked a supplementary question asking whether

Medway Council agreed with Ofsted’s chief inspector that St Peter’s was achieving a good Ofsted with outstanding features in April 2011 which was no mean feat considering the school’s recent history?

 

Councillor Wicks responded by agreeing that the Ofsted inspection service is first class and that the Council always respected its findings.

 

(D)       Angie Burdett of Chatham asked the Portfolio Holder for Children’s Services, Councillor Wicks, the following question:

 

Councillor Wicks, I hear that Medway Council are planning to build new schools in the Chatham area due to a shortage of available school places.  If this is true, please could you explain to me why I, along with other parents, spent over a year and a half, fighting you and Medway Council from closing St John’s CEVC Infant School, which is in Chatham Central?

 

The Portfolio Holder for Children’s Services, Councillor Wicks thanked Mrs Burdett for her question and advised that St John’s CEVC Infant School was considered for closure because it had a high proportion of surplus places and small numbers of pupils overall, which raised concerns about the viability of the school and its cost effectiveness. This was consistent with the Council’s School Organisation principles, which stated that the Council would review the future of schools that were at risk of becoming unviable.

Following lengthy and detailed consultation, a decision was taken not to close the school, and Councillor Wicks confirmed that he was pleased to hear that pupil numbers at the school had since risen, although rolls at the school remained relatively small overall.  

 

For the primary phase it was only ever possible to predict the number of pupils that would be joining schools in reception year up to 5 years in advance, so on an annual basis the Council revised its forecasts using the most up to date birth data.

 

Mrs Burdett then asked a supplementary question referring tothe failure in school closure and mergers, the overspend at Walderslade, the fiasco of Woodlands and Borstal all of which Rose Collinson and her team had put together, and she asked why Councillor Wicks considered Rose Collinson should stay in her position because the public called for her resignation due to her incompetent handling of her department and the consistent inaccurate figures and information currently totalling £4.1 million?

 

Councillor Wicks responded by confirming that he had no more to say on this matter than he had already said on the subject.

 

(E)       Tony Jeacock of Rainham asked the Deputy Leader and Portfolio Holder for Finance, Councillor Jarrett, the following question:

 

When deciding that Medway Council employees should no longer receive paper-based salary slips, did those responsible for this decision consider that some employees may have no internet access by which to download this vital monthly information, or that other personal inconveniences may be forthcoming, and if not, why not?

 

The Deputy Leader and Portfolio Holder for Finance, Councillor Jarrett thanked Mr Jeacock for his question. He advised that Selfserve4you was the Council’s new online system regarding employees’ personal details including the provision of payslips. Employees could now access this information either at work or at internet enabled PC’s around the world.

 

Prior to introducing this system, the Council had considered the number of properties in Medway that had internet access, as the vast majority of the Council’s employees resided in Medway and the Council established that over 90% of properties in Medway had internet access at the present time.

 

In addition, the Council ensured that managers were supportive of those employees who did not use PCs within the work environment so that they could access them. As a result, many schools and other Council buildings had set up access within staff rooms and Medway employees could now access and print their payslips free of charge at any Medway library. In addition, staff hubs have been set up at Gun Wharf and in Strood.

 

Running alongside this, the Council had offered basic PC skills training to anyone who needed it and the library service also offered this for anyone who did not wish to come into Gun Wharf for training.

 

Any individual who could not access a computer for health reasons, such as a disability, had been given the option to continue to have a paper copy of their payslip.

 

Therefore, there should be nobody working for Medway Council who was unable to access their payslips, be it electronically or by hard copy. Furthermore he encouraged anyone who required assistance with Selfserve4you to contact the Human Resources Department.

 

Mr Jeacock asked a supplementary question pointing out that the UK’s major banks were creating an administrative nightmare for both mortgage advisers and mortgage applicants alike by refusing to accept online statements as proof of income and identity. He stated that of the five top banks, only Santander, representing an 18.4% market share according to the Council of Mortgage Lender statistics, said it would accept paperless applications but even they reserved the right to request original paperwork for underwriting requirements. He therefore asked whether Councillor Jarrett considered it fair to employees of Medway Council to restrict their access to mortgage lenders and in some instances possibly deny them any access at all or did he agree that it was a badly thought out decision to go paperless and, if so, would he promise to oversee a reversal to paper-based salary slips forthwith?

 

In response, Councillor Jarrett commented that there were a number of questions within Mr Jeacock’s supplementary question and therefore he wouldaddress the start of Mr Jeacock’s supplementary question which related to the major banks. He stated that Mr Jeacock should direct his questions to the major banks and not to Medway Council because that really was the nub of his concerns.

 

(F)            Lawrence McVeigh of Rochester asked the Portfolio Holder for Children’s Services, Councillor Wicks, the following question:

 

Has Medway Council had any preliminary discussions with possible sponsors of a new school in the Rochester/Chatham area?

 

The Portfolio Holder for Children’s Services, Councillor Wicks thanked Mr McVeigh for his question. He advised that preliminary discussions had not yet been undertaken and, as set out in the draft School Organisation Plan, the Council intended to invite expressions of interest from potential sponsors in the autumn of this year, following consultation on the plan.

 

Mr McVeigh then asked a supplementary question and referred to paragraph 4.30 of the school organisation plan. This stated that sponsors of new schools may be existing schools who were good with outstanding features. Therefore would this enable St Peter’s Infants to expand in the future.

 

Councillor Wicks responded by confirming that the statement in the school organisation plan was exactly what it says. This would enable any additional places to be provided by free schools or indeed by good schools by expansion.

 

(G)       Cathy Hyland of Rochester asked the Portfolio Holder for Children’s Services, Councillor Wicks, the following question:

 

How does Medway Council plan to support St Peter’s - a good and popular school - in the future?

 

The Portfolio Holder for Children’s Services, Councillor Wicks thanked Ms Hyland for her question. He stated that the responsibility for the continued success and effectiveness of the school, as with any school, lay with the governing body and senior leadership. A school could use its budget to commission external support to help to address key priorities if it so wished. Medway Council continued to support all its schools in analysing data and, in addition, the Council had a small team of school improvement colleagues who could offer advice and consultancy, if requested by the school. 

 

Ms Hyland asked a supplementary question  enquiring as to whether Councillors agreed with Ofsted that St Peter’s met Medway Council’s aims within the Young People’s Plan for 2014 that children are safe and cared for and succeed in learning and thrive?

 

Councillor Wicks responded by confirming that Medway Councilalways agreed with the Ofsted inspector’s report because it was an objective report and the Council would not disagree with it.

 

(H)       Mr T Hopper of Rochester asked the Portfolio Holder for Children’s Services, Councillor Wicks, the following question:

 

Are there any schools in the Rochester area under threat of closure?

 

The Portfolio Holder for Children’s Services, Councillor Wicks responded by stating that there were no schools in the Rochester area under threat of closure.

 

Mr Hopper asked a supplementary question enquiring as to whether Medway Council agreed that St Peter’s was now a popular choice as the September 2011 intake was oversubscribed with a 41 pupil intake against the capacity of 40?

 

Councillor Wicks responded by stating that he was glad to see thatSt Peter’s was doing well.

 

(I)         Mrs J Worrall of Rochester asked the Portfolio Holder for Children’s Services, Councillor Wicks, the following question:

 

In Medway Council’s own presentation to Council it claims the birth rate in Medway increased by over 10% between 2005 and 2009

from 3122 births to 3375 births. Why was this information not made public during the previous school closure campaigns?”

 

The Portfolio Holder for Children’s Services, Councillor Wicks thanked Mrs Worrall for her question. In response he advised that as explained in an earlier answer, officers used actual birth rate data to forecast pupil numbers, and these forecasts were made public during the Council’s consultation with schools about possible closure.

 

Mrs Worrall referred to the unmitigated disaster of the proposed closures of good infant schools two years’ ago, and asked a supplementary question as to what procedures Councillor Wicks had put in place to ensure that Council officers were providing him with current and accurate information, for example births rates, that do not mislead the people of Medway.

 

Councillor Wicks responded by confirming that the Council had the most up-to-date clear information for the basis of its forecasts and it was from that information that the Council planned ahead as it was statutorily bound to do to ensure there were adequate school places.

 

(J)       Mrs C Newman of Rochester asked the Portfolio Holder for Children’s Services, Councillor Wicks, the following question:

 

In light of the birth rate figures, and St Peter’s being over subscribed for September 2011, does Medway Council accept that St Peter’s is a ‘viable school’ in a thriving community?

 

The Portfolio Holder for Children’s Services, Councillor Wicks thanked Mrs Newman for her question. He advised that the proposal to close St Peter’s was due to concerns about the viability of the school at that time which had surplus capacity and low pupil numbers. After detailed and thorough consultation, the Council’s Cabinet had decided not to close St Peter’s and he was very pleased, sincerely, to see that pupil numbers had risen since and would agree that St Peter’s was currently a viable school.

 

Mrs Newman then asked a supplementary question as to whether Medway Council could provide a firm definition of a school that it considered to be educationally and financially viable as stated in point 1.2 of the new school plan?

 

Councillor Wicks advised that he would supply a written answer to this question.

 

(K)       Mrs E Dhiman of Rochester asked the Portfolio Holder for Children’s Services, Councillor Wicks, the following question:

 

Please could the Portfolio Holder detail the full cost to the taxpayer for the previous public consultation process for Ridge Meadow, St Peter’s & St John’s School proposed closures?

 

The Portfolio Holder for Children’s Services, Councillor Wicks thanked Mrs Dhiman for her question. He advised that the consultations were managed in house and within existing budgets. A detailed consultation was essential to ensure that the Council took into account everyone’s views before making a decision.

 

The cost of running a consultation represented good value for money, particularly in the context of the money spent on schools in Medway overall.

 

Mrs Dhiman then asked a supplementary questionand in doing so commented that she had not heard Councillor Wicks mention the cost of the consultation process. Mrs Dhiman referred to the fact that all three campaigns had questioned the accuracy of the figures from the start, and she therefore asked what was the job of the Cabinet if not to scrutinise the Council officers figures and to ensure that taxpayers’ money wasn’t wasted on pointless exercises as proved to be the case in the school closures consultation?

 

Councillor Wicks responded by stating thatthe Cabinet had done exactly what a Cabinet was meant to do i.e. review the report presented to it and make decisions accordingly. He stated that this was all good value for money as far as he was concerned.

 

(L)       Julia Finch of Chatham asked the Portfolio Holder for Children’s Services, Councillor Wicks, the following question:

 

Could the portfolio holder please confirm the final figure for the cost of the rebuild of Walderslade Primary School?

 

The Portfolio Holder for Children’s Services, Councillor Wicks thanked Ms Finch for her question. He advised that the project for Walderslade Primary School would be completed for the start of the next school term in September and was therefore still ongoing. The project’s final cost was £6,220,000 and was due to be completed on time and on budget. He added that this would be a first class addition to Medway’s primary offer.

 

Ms Finch asked a supplementary question by querying whether Medway Council believed that £6 million was a justifiable use of taxpayers’ money on a school which was experiencing a downward Ofsted trend in the last seven years from very good to good to satisfactory in 2011?

 

Councillor Wicks confirmed that he did think this was a justifiable use of taxpayers’ money.

 

(M)      Mr A Paterson of Rochester asked the Portfolio Holder for Children’s Services, Councillor Wicks, the following question:

 

Can the Portfolio Holder detail what statistical basis was used for point 2.32 of the new Draft School Organisational Plan which states: ‘By 2016 demand for denominational places is expected to rise in line with the trend for all primary schools, which may result in the demand for denominational places exceeding supply.’

 

The Portfolio Holder for Children’s Services, Councillor Wicks thanked Mr Paterson for his question. He advised that the Council uses the same data to forecast the demand for places at denominational schools as all other schools in Medway and the Council produces forecasts for each individual school.

 

Forecasts showed that demand for denominational places overall were expected to rise at a similar rate to the increase in demand for Medway Schools overall.

 

The Council was therefore forecasting a reduction in the number of surplus places at denominational schools and this expected trend would be taken into account when looking to establish new provision.

 

Mr Paterson then asked a supplementary question asking ifCouncillor Wicks was aware of the results of the British Social Attitudes Survey of 2009, which showed that more than half of the UK population stated that they had no religion and only 10.5% of the population attended church once a week or more. On this basis, and as a parent in Rochester, in the Wards of Rochester East and Rochester West he had a choice of three denominational schools versus two non-denominational schools. He asked Councillor Wicks if he agreed that  it was denominational schools which were currently over provided for and it was non-denominational schools that the area required?

 

Councillor Wicks stated that he did not consider this to beover provision and an assessment would be made according to the plan of what denominational needs would be in due course but, at the moment he was content with the current provision in these Wards.

 

(N)       Tony Jeacock of Rainham asked the Portfolio Holder for Housing and Community Services, Councillor Doe, the following question:

 

Due to the current state of the economy, if, as statistics suggest, private landlords fall into mortgage arrears due to the knock-on effect of tenants falling into rental arrears, ultimately resulting in their Buy-to-Let properties being repossessed, what contingency plans, if any, has Medway Council set aside to ensure tenant families can remain securely housed?

 

The Portfolio Holder for Housing and Community Services, Councillor Doe thanked Mr Jeacock for his question and stated that this was an extremely important subject. He confirmed that one of the things that the Council tried to do was to encourage tenants to be aware of their entitlement to housing benefits and also to tackle problems with arrears at an early stage before they became critical. If, however, in some cases, depending on the mortgage, the lender becomes the landlord after repossession of the property from the landlord then they may choose not to evict the tenant. In other cases when the tenant becomes aware, bearing in mind the mortgage company may not know that the landlord is renting the property or that the landlord has failed to inform their tenant, they are able to apply to have the eviction delayed for up to two months. The eviction would generally then still go ahead but the mortgage lender may agree to take on the tenant for a fixed term or delay for two months to allow time for the tenant to find alternative accommodation.

 

Councillor Doe confirmed that the Council had commissioned the Citizen’s Advice Bureau to provide a debt and court desk to assist in just these kind of cases although they were, so far, limited in number. The Council may, however, have specific duties in relation to this area where the clients were vulnerable and they may be unintentionally homeless. In such cases, the Council offered advice and assistance to help the client find suitable alternative accommodation and if it was not possible to do that then the Council would obviously accept the homelessness application and then provide further assistance, if required by way of temporary or permanent accommodation. In all these cases, the Council worked very closely with other social housing providers.

 

Mr Jeacock then asked a supplementary question. He pointed out that the statistical evidence was that in terms of mortgaged residential properties and mortgaged buy-to-let properties in the South East, the Medway Towns had the highest level of such repossessions. Bearing in mind the fact that there were already numerous long term empty residential premises in the Medway Towns, would the Portfolio Holder not agree that now would be a good time to reinstate those housing officials who were unwisely made redundant so that these properties could be officially identified, repaired and brought into community-owned residential use and if not, why not?

 

In response, Councillor Doe stated that he did not agree with this suggestion as the work was still going on and the Council did have the ability, working with social landlords to do as much as possible in this area. He stated that a great deal was being achieved and he did not therefore see that reinstating this team to administer grants that no longer exist would be very helpful.