Minutes:
Officers provided a brief overview on the report outlined
within the circulated agenda. This included an outline of the process and
options available to Cabinet when considering the report.
Members of the scrutiny committee first considered the consultation
process. Members referred to the risk outlined within the report concerning the
staff and community resisting any change to education as a result of any
decision made. Officers advised that the Risk Assessment contained mitigations
around this and officers also emphasised their knowledge and experience in
delivering school reorganisation across the borough.
Officers confirmed that there were 13 different face to face
meetings with various representatives from the community. There was also one
face to face public meeting and one online public meeting. Members had been
provided all the consultation responses received. Where possible, the
consultation report had outlined facts and evidence to respond to comments
received.
It was confirmed that the political aspects of any
correspondence that was sent out during the consultation period, had nothing to
do with officers.
Officers outlined that the intention of consultation was to
assist with shaping a proposal and to ensure that officers have thought of
everything to assist with formulating recommendations for Cabinet to consider.
From officers’ experience, the majority of consultation responses usually
received are against a proposal.
It was confirmed that the £14.7million capital grant from
Welsh Government has been ring fenced for school reorganisation within Neath
Port Talbot. However, members could not determine where this money could be
spent if the proposals were not agreed by Cabinet. A further satisfactory grant
funding application would have to be made to access any money from Welsh
Government.
As part of the process, officers are obliged to undertake a
community impact assessment. It was undertaken and included as part of the
consultation documentation. That concluded that there was very little use of
the schools by the community. The use that is being made by the community is
mainly by parents or family groups. It was confirmed that new schools are
obliged to have properly considered and thought out community access. Members
were concerned that the new facilities would not be within the same communities
that they are currently situated.
With regards to the playing fields, it was confirmed that
the new site does have sufficient room for the school and to maintain the
current number of playing fields. Further that they would be compliant with
requirements of various sports.
Welsh Government are keen to promote community use of new
school provisions. It would be incumbent on the governing body of the school to
ensure that this happens.
Officers outlined that the LDP is currently undergoing a
review. The LDP has to ensure that sustainable communities are delivered going
forward and has to be aligned with various other policies and strategies. It
was acknowledged that the site identified for the potential new school is a
difficult site. However, a long list of sites was considered prior to this one
being agreed and the identified site was the most acceptable, including access
to public transport and walking and cycling routes. Specific issues in relation
to the planning of the site, would be fully considered at the planning
application stage.
Members expressed their concern at the pupil numbers
identified for the new school .The numbers of the three schools amalgamated
together do not meet the numbers required for the new school. Members queried how these figures were
arrived at. Officers confirmed that the proposal outlines the number of pupils
that could claim a place within the catchment. It does not include Welsh medium
schools. Further there are no intentions to close any other schools within the
Swansea Valley. The number includes future planning, future developments and
the number of pupils that could claim a place within the catchment area.
It was noted that over the last 10 years, the number of
pupils attending schools in the Swansea Valley has increased by 160.
Members specifically questioned the safe routes to school
plan in relation to Alltwen. Officers outlined the
route from the current Alltwen Primary School site
down to the proposed site of the new school. Officers confirmed that should the
proposal proceed then every pupil accessing the new school would have their
safe route to school individually assessed.
Relevant detailed traffic management plans would be
undertaken as part of the planning process, not as part of the current process.
However officers were confident that it would be only require minor highway
works to be undertaken should the proposal progress. A survey has been
undertaken to determine the current existing transport in the area.
Members raised concerns with industry capacity issues for
the required home to school transport. Officers advised that currently it was
only planned for one extra bus to be required, therefore this should not be an
issue.
Officers outlined how the school could ensure that children
accessing the transport could still attend after school clubs. This would be a
decision for the school governing body on how this was managed.
Members were concerned that unless a child was in full-time
education then they could not access home to school transport and this could
ultimately result in a decline in the number of children attending nursery.
Welsh Government policy sets out that transport does not have to be provided
for nursery children, however officers confirmed that members could look at the
NPT policy if they wished to do so.
It was noted that active travel is a priority of Welsh
Government and there is ongoing investment with regards to it in terms of
bidding for the funding. There is ongoing work being undertaken by the
authority to assess active travel routes and ensure that the community have
maximum access to suitable routes.
Members expressed their concern that there were no exact
costings with regards to changes to highways in response to the proposal.
Officers advised that they are experienced at delivering schemes within the
funding envelopes that are in place. It was agreed that both Welsh Government
and NPTCBC contributions would have increased since the original case was put
together in 18/19.
Officers advised that they were satisfied that the highway
network could accommodate the increase in volume of traffic. However, officers
informed that they did not know the exact costings for any highway works and if
any further amendments would need to be made to highway plans.
Officers confirmed the two biggest factors that determine
the standard in a school are the quality of leadership and management in a
school and the quality of teaching. As a general rule, there are better quality
applicants for larger schools than smaller schools in terms of headship.
Members were reminded that Estyn
were a statutory consultee with regards to the proposals. Their comments
indicated that the standards across the schools would at least be maintained,
if not improved.
Members were informed that if the proposals were approved a
shadow governing body would be formed. This governing body would appoint a new Headteacher for the school. A structure will then be agreed
for the school. The local authority will then ask the shadow governing body to
take a decision to ring fence all the jobs in the new school from the existing
staff at the schools.
It was confirmed that Welsh Government would fund
significant remodelling of schools, in addition to new builds. However, any
business case would need to satisfy the 5 case business model and also the
BREEAM standards.
Members considered the Welsh Language impact assessment.
There are 13 impacts identified. There are mitigations identified in the assessment.
Officers noted that it is an assessment only and not documented facts. The
assessment considers the proposal as a whole and identifies potential impacts –
both positive and negative. Many of the identified actions have also been input
into the WESP.
Welsh language primary schools are still experiencing low
transfer numbers. Members were concerned the proposal will have a further
negative impact on pupils attending Welsh medium schools.
Officers confirmed the proposed school projected numbers was
based upon the current numbers from the three schools and the pupils in the
catchment area for the proposed schools.
Officers confirmed that pupils can travel across border to
attend schools outside of NPT. Officers confirmed if they were able to put an
ASD provision into the current schools, this would have been done already. If
the proposal falls, a suitable provision will need to be sourced elsewhere
within the county.
Members considered the new swimming pool which is part of
the proposal. Members queried if the proposal falls, what are the consequences
for the three schools and the swimming pool moving forward?
With regards to Alltwen and Llangiwg, the schools will continue to remain open and they
will be maintained as all current schools are within the current maintenance
budget and programme. With regards to Godre’graig,
advice will need to be given with regards to how to proceed, including
provision for a new school and business cases to be drafted. Officers confirmed
it will be very difficult to secure capital funding for a new school. In terms
of the swimming pool, this would not be funded by Welsh Government. There is
possible grant funding available from Sports Wales, up to £300,000 however the
potential cost of a replacement pool would be £13million at this time. Officers
confirmed the pool will close in two years’ time, at the longest.
Officers outlined the current state and potential
maintenance of the swimming pool.
Following scrutiny
A recorded vote was proposed and seconded and agreed.
The recommendation as outlined on page 36 of the Cabinet
report was proposed and seconded.
For: Cllrs C.Clement-Williams, M.Crowley, C.Galsworthy, R.Jones, R.Mizen, S.Paddison, S.Pursey, P.Rees, S.Renkes, S.Reynolds, D.Whitelock,
Against: Cllrs T.Bowen, W.Carpenter, N.Goldup-John, J.Henton, C.James, J.Jones, C.Lewis, C.Phillips, R.Phillips, A.Richards, P.Rogers, M.Spooner, D.Thomas,
Abstain: M.Caddick.
Following scrutiny, the recommendation was not supported to
Cabinet.