Primary school head teachers snubbed council education chiefs, walking out of a meeting to discuss a proposal to join schools together into “federations”.
The aim would be to share senior roles, some specialist and support staff as well as governor positions as the number of children falls and financial deficits grow. Some jobs could go.
The timetable has left some heads and governors concerned that Brighton and Hove City Council is trying to rush them into decisions that might preclude them from joining an academy trust instead.
More than 40 primary heads walked out of the meeting called by Brighton and Hove City Council last week as officials prepared to start a consultation.
They later sent a joint statement to the council, saying: “We understand that do nothing is not an option.
“However, we cannot respond to this proposal because it is not a clear and coherent plan.
“We have heard your message and we will use the next year to investigate all options available.
“The professional standards that we have all signed up to mean that any structural change to the running of our schools must be subject to due diligence.
“As such we cannot rush a momentous decision. Therefore, we cannot commit to a yes or no decision at this state.”
Their comments echo remarks by the Office of the Schools Adjudicator which recognised a need for urgent action but warned the council against making hasty decisions.
The council shared its initial proposal with heads and chair of governors at a meeting at the cricket ground, in Eaton Road, Hove, on Monday 10 June.
It followed up with a further meeting last week led by council education bosses Jo Lyons and Richard Barker – the meeting at which head teachers walked out.
On Friday (28 June), the council published a consultation document as councillors and officials wrestle with falling rolls and worsening finances.
Some schools locally have already been forced to become academies while others have chosen to join “multi-academy trusts”.
The council has been keen to keep as many local state schools as possible within the local authority family of schools. Among the benefits are that costs for specialist services such as human resources (HR) can be shared more widely.
Currently, half of the local authority maintained schools in Brighton and Hove are in the red and, with fewer children living in the area, primary schools have hundreds of empty classroom places.
Funding is based on the number of pupils – and budgets are getting tighter with fewer than 2,000 children expected to start school in September 2025 and 2026.
In response, 300 reception class places have been cut collectively across Brighton and Hove from September and the council has decided to close two primaries.
St Peter’s, Portslade, is due to close this summer and, after an appeal, St Bartholomew’s, in Brighton, is now due to close at the end of December.
The appeal decision was published last month by the Office of the Schools Adjudicator. The decision letter said that the council had an urgent need to reduce places – but warned against making hasty decisions which would affect vulnerable young children.
Jo Lyons, the council’s assistant director for families, children and learning, said that the timing and speed of the proposals would be “challenging” in a letter to heads and chairs of governors.
She asked schools to let the council know if they wished to engage with the federation process by Tuesday 23 July. Some fear that an early indication could limit their schools’ options.
She said: “We acknowledge the pressure of the proposed timescales and the concerns they have raised.
“We want to clarify that this is the beginning of a conversation. Nothing has been confirmed.
“We want all schools to contribute to the discussion about the future as we have a great opportunity to shape something new and innovative together in the face of the city’s challenging situation.
“We recognise the pressure for swift action but we also need to get this right which creates a tension.
“We have listened to your concerns and understand the initial proposed timescales are not realistic for all schools or for widespread systemic change.
“A phased approach is more likely to be practical.
“We will be supporting early adopters to progress the initiative and hope to work with everyone to develop pathways and timelines towards implementing the proposal.”
The leader of the council’s Conservative group, Alistair McNair, said that it was disappointing to see the council pushing for federation.
Councillor McNair said: “It means job losses. You cannot meddle with the structure of schools without risking severe harm to our children’s education.
“Labour want hard-pressed schools who manage their budgets to suffer more staff shortages to cover their own budget mismanagement.
“Labour broke their promise not to close schools – now they are threatening schools.
“It is true that many schools are in deficit and have been badly managed by the local authority over many years.
“On the other hand, many schools do manage their budgets and their education extremely well.”
The council said that the financial situation was challenging and many schools were facing large deficit budgets.
At this time last year, the council asked schools to reduce their deficits by 10 per cent.
The council said: “The council is pursuing a number of courses of action to tackle this issue including increasing the direct support we provide to schools to help them with budget management.
“We are also exploring a possible federation model which could see schools joining together to share resources and talent and therefore potentially saving money and making our school system more resilient.
“We understand any such proposal would be a big change for schools which is why we have sought to proactively engage head teachers and chairs of governors to develop the plan.”
The council added that “a number of head teachers chose not to meet with council officers … for further discussions around this”.
But it said: “A survey has now been circulated for completion and we hope they continue to work with us in a constructive way.”
Ditch the trans toolkit and all teacher training payments to Allsorts and other dodgy organisations which have no place in schools. That should save a few quid.
There does seem to be a lot if baggage attached to education these days, all adding to the cost of running a school.
It’ll save an enormous amount in council legal fees and personal losses for Headteacher and Governors’ careers.
Let’s make it about trans hate why don’t we. How sad.
Labours policies are driving families out of the City to the suburbs at best or to other towns, exacerbating the falling numbers of children at our schools.
Think you will find that it’s the very high price of living in Brighton and Hove that is forcing families to move out! It’s hardly the Labour Council policies. What policies are you referring to or have you just jumped onto a ‘let’s bash Labour because the Conservative government has spent the last 14 years wringing the necks of the many who live in our city ? ‘
Hmm, I wonder how effective not talking is going to be. Still, an extremely tricky situation all round.
Just like in my home country, politicians who have never been in a classroom are drafting educational policies and directives. If they need expert heads I am available for a short while.
Namse
MAIED, University of Sussex
So a meeting to discuss an option and hear alternatives was not to their liking but they understand that ‘do nothing is not an option’ ….. Sounds like a childish reaction to just walk out. If they’re not involved then a solution will be imposed.
The local authority does not manage schools, school governors manage them.
Alistair should know that, he is after all a school governor!
Councillor McNair said: “It means job losses. You cannot meddle with the structure of schools without risking severe harm to our children’s education.
“Labour want hard-pressed schools who manage their budgets to suffer more staff shortages to cover their own budget mismanagement.”
Rubbish.
Federation / merging won’t lead to job losses. It will protect jobs. Busgets will be spent on teachers and other staff not on empty buildings.
And it is YOUR Government who set school bdgets and expect schools to manage them and which are totally separate from the councils general budget.
Surporsed how the leader of the Tory group does not know that.
Labour simply need to have greater respect for teachers and staff in the city’s schools. They are not stupid and know there’s a problem with pupil numbers falling, and most would be willing to engage with the council if they were open to proper discussion, rather than the council’s faux “consultation” farce.
Staff at schools know their pupils best and have their best interests at heart – it’s dreadful for Labour councillors to push these things through in the way they are, good to hear Heads are pushing back.
Good on the Heads for doing the right thing.
It sounds like politicians and the Council want to tell Headteachers how to run their schools.
If they stuck to their jobs and their promises then the education system would not be in the current state it is.
Schools needs investment not further backdoor cuts.
Investment comes by not spending school budgets on under used buildings which is the real back door cut as school budgets are based on pupil numbers.
Fewer pupils means less budget for that school and growing deficits unless they reduce their expenditure.
If schools don’t get their acts together and work together then they’ll have less influence when it does come to which schools have their intakes reduced or even closed.
for 5 years education consisting mainly of Play outside for four hours a day and teaching for rest of day from what limited insight I have and I can see. Am I wrong ?
Is the money allocated fairly. Will labour’s give more money? Is this pooling beneficial to the children and the objections unfounded because of inconvenience to adults?
School budgets are set based on a fixed amount per pupil with some extra funding for schools with a larger number of deprived pupils for example.
The budgets are set by the government not the council so the council isn’t cutting a school budget in one part of the city to favour one in another part.
Schools that work together they are more likely to retain teachers which helps pupils. Sure a teacher may have to spend time working between schools but that could prevent one school closing down completely or a teacher having their hours cut in half because neither school can pay for a full timer.
But the problem we have here (though it’s not just here) is the amount of surplus spaces is way too large and the government only allows 10% excess places.
As the the Schools Adjudicator said in a recent report about St Bart’s school the council has put off again and again making hard decisions on school closures and consolidations.
I understand the Heads may be angry but walking out of a meeting will not change the position that excess places need to be taken out of the system.
The only reason for these changes is to move choices about school and classroom closures away from politicians and onto federations.
There’s no other LA that has done this and the LA are able to provide as an example of either delivery of education improving or budget challenges being resolved.
It’s a policy whose sole purpose is to protect councillors from the political consequences of falling pupil numbers and school closures. They’ll commission a federation for a number of places not individual schools and if the federation decide to close a provision it’s not the councillors fault. That’s it, that’s the benefit.
This is the crew who decided to shut down the very good central Brighton primary school St Bart’s which catered for many special needs and low income kids, Ofsted rating “Good.”