Several groups of people have been concerned about the way that the council has carried out their statutory (ie. essential) consultations with the public when removing or reducing services in their cuts package. The latest concerns discretionary concessionary travel to faith schools. Here’s the latest, in their words – Ed
Campaigners seeking to persuade the Council to continue discretionary concessionary travel for pupils attending faith schools on the Island have today written to every member of the Council warning that the online survey commissioned by the Council to sample opinion is so fundamentally flawed as to “be against the principles of natural justice and potentially unlawful”.
A detailed list of errors in the consultation exercise have been highlighted by Totland resident, Chris Whitehouse
Dear Councillor,
I am sorry to trouble you again and hope that you will forgive me for the length of this note, but I would not write in such detail if the content were not of crucial importance to the reputation of the Council.
I have now been approached by dozens of contacts seeking advice about the Council’s online consultation in relation to discretionary concessionary travel for pupils travelling to faith schools.
-
There is widespread confusion and concern that Section 5 of the on-line survey produced by the Council invites respondents to pick one of three options, all of which are variations on the theme of concessionary transport being withdrawn, with the only difference being the timescale for the implementation of that decision. Clearly, this does not allow respondents to select their widely preferred option which is “no change”.
This flaw in methodology would seem to be so fundamental that the survey will inevitably produce a substantially distorted result, and would therefore inevitably be an unsound basis for the Council’s future decision-making, as well as being contrary to the principles of natural justice.
- Nor does the consultation document give any information about the actual savings that might accrue from any of the options for the changes to the current arrangements (either those included in the documentation or those omitted). Without such information, respondents cannot make an informed decision; nor can the Council.
- The survey is further flawed in that the nature of the Survey Monkey model adopted means that the questionnaire can only be completed online once from any given PC or laptop. This means that families with only one such device are denied the opportunity to submit a response from more than one member of the household. This cannot be right since it denies such households the opportunity to demonstrate either a common or a different view among the individual members. It is clearly discriminatory against such households.
- Furthermore, although the online Consultation Document suggests that a paper version of the form may be printed off and sent in by post, there is actually no facility provided to download such a form. Nor can copies of the Survey Monkey form itself be downloaded once it has been completed and submitted by one individual, since it is impossible to return to the form once it is submitted.
- I understand that the Chair of Governors of Christ the King College has today written to the Leader of the Council highlighting the bias in the survey; pointing out that the statistical and financial data cited in the consultation document in relation to the numbers of pupils affected and hence the costs involved are substantially inaccurate; and regretting that the Council did not first discuss that data to ensure that the public are not misled.
- The date chosen by the Council for the main public consultation event at Christ the King College, the evening of 23rd June, traditionally the Feast of Corpus Christi, is a day when the Catholic Clergy of the Island have a longstanding commitment to attend an event on the mainland and they will, therefore, be denied the opportunity to attend that consultation meeting.
- The date chosen for the second of the two consultation meetings, namely 28th June, falls right in the middle of the Island Games when so many individuals and families have commitments. This would have been well known to the Council when the date was unilaterally chosen.
- It is clear that there was no consultation either with the Clergy or with the faith school governing bodies to ascertain whether the dates for the two meetings were suitable.
-
The original timetable for the consultation outlined by officers and the Leader of the Council to the scrutiny panel on 13th April, and circulated the next day to members, would have been unlawful were it to have been followed.
It was only when I pointed this out to officers that the timetable was revised, and whilst now meeting the minimum requirements of the legislation, it still does not meet the best practice provisions of the Government’s Code of Practice on Consultations either in terms of timescale or in terms of content and conduct.
Given that the decision to proceed with this consultation was taken on 12th October 2010, there can be no excuse for the Council’s delay in commencing that consultation and, in so delaying, failing to comply with best practice timelines.
-
The proposed changes to travel arrangements should be considered against the provisions of the Council’s Sustainable Modes of Travel Strategy which should be on the Council’s web site (a legal requirement). There should also be supporting documents:
a. The assessment of the travel and transport needs of children
b. An audit of the sustainable travel and transport infrastructure
c. A strategy to develop infrastructure with the authority so that it better meets the needs of children, and
d. A strategy to meet the duty to promote sustainable school transport
The above are the requirements of Section 508 of the Education Action 1996, as amended by the Education and Inspections Act 2006.
I have been unable to find such documents on the web site and last week requested urgent copies from officers. I have had no response.
If the documents do exist, they should have been referenced in this consultation exercise and sent to me as requested. If they do not exist, the Council may be in breach of the law.
- It is also a requirement that the Sustainable Modes of Travel Strategy should be cited in the Council’s Children and Young People’s Plan. I have read the current version of that Plan and can find no such reference. I have asked officers for the reference, but again, they have not replied.
Errors, omissions and failures
Whether these errors, omissions and failures are intentional or accidental is unclear, but they are certainly unacceptable.
Whatever your views about the principle of discretionary concessionary travel being made available for pupils attending faith schools, I am confident you will want to ensure that the Council proceeds in an open, transparent, fair, professional and lawful manner that does not leave it open to having to mount a costly and potentially unsuccessful defence should a Judicial Review of this process be initiated in due course.
Under the circumstances, to continue to proceed with this consultation and to base decisions upon its conclusions, given the bias in the questions and the other flaws mentioned above, would be quite wrong, and potentially unlawful. I do hope therefore that you will consider contacting the Leader of the Council to ask that the consultation be suspended and withdrawn without delay before the Council is brought even further into disrepute.
I look forward to hearing from you.
Thank you for your patience in reading this lengthy submission.
With kind regards and all good wishes.
Chris Whitehouse
