Peter Shreeve, District Secretary, Isle of Wight branch of the National Education Union, shares his view of the Extraordinary Full Council meeting. Ed
Imagine trying to grasp the detail in the Extraordinary Council meeting on school closures live (watch here if you missed it).
In the councillors only section of the meeting, confusion concerning the amended motion arose throughout. Eventually solved and split into two votes.
- Was the consultation process fair?
- Was the statutory closure notice supported?
The discussion focussed mainly around the first. Indeed, this was the concern of all stakeholders.
Morrison: Are councillors confident to go on?
During public questions, NEU Secretary Duncan Morrison, asked,
“Given that at the beginning of the process members involved in meetings were told academies would be included in the process.
“Given that on this very council chamber we were told the dioceses was fully involved in the process.
“Given that the economy with the truth that has pervaded this process, are councillors confident to go on?”
‘Equity of treatment’
The councillor’s section was dominated by similar concerns. Councillor Lilley said,
“How can the IW Council not seriously listen to one of the key stakeholders?”
Councillor Jarman picked up Councillor Brodie’s need for ‘equity of treatment’. Despite asking for consultation response papers, they were not forthcoming. Access was limited to ‘corporate scrutiny’ and the cabinet. He said,
“I don’t know whether there has been equity of treatment because I’m not allowed to see the paperwork.”
Councillor Spink shared that he had seen these ‘sensitive’ documents. He couldn’t disclose contents, but they “have raised in my view serious issues around the procedure”.
A “headlong rush towards anther crash”
A “headlong rush towards anther crash” as “criteria simply don’t exist”, said Councillor Stuart. He stressed the essential need of having shared criteria as part of an agreed planning process before any process starts. He doesn’t believe the process is “transparent, clear and fair”.
As Chair for the Policy and Scrutiny Committee for Children’s Services, Councillor Brading shared they had made recommendation to officers regarding the need to consider every response and alternative suggestions. Yet they didn’t see the consultation recommendations either.
“Substantially uninformed”
Councillor Jarman asked for clarification regarding whether all members should be allowed to vote, as without access, they were likely to be “substantially uninformed” due to a lack of report access.
In short, the officer response – a “need to know”. Council advises and cabinet makes the decision. Only cabinet “needs to know”.
For stakeholders, this is the issue. Why do we need to keep consultation reports confidential and sensitive at this stage?
This is why so many believe the process should be paused.
