Agenda and minutes

RESOLVED:  To note that (1) apologies were received from Councillor Alan Kaufmann;

(2)  Councillor Jem Duducu would be substituted by Councillor Judy Kelly; and

(3)  Councillor John Oswell would be substituted by Councillor Jazz Dhillon.

No interests were declared.

None.

It was confirmed that all items were Part I and would be heard in public.

RESOLVED:  That (1) the minutes of the meeting held on 23 November 2016 be confirmed as a correct record of the meeting; and

(2)  a Member wished it to be recorded that they considered the minutes to be "brilliant".

The Chairman welcomed the witnesses representing Hillingdon schools' executive committees.  It was noted that six executive committees had been invited:

·            Primary Forum Executive

·            Hillingdon Association of Secondary Headteachers Executive

·            Schools Forum

·            Schools Strategic Partnership Board

·            Governor Executive Committee

·            Regional Schools Commissioner

Of these, only the Regional Schools Commissioner had not been able to send a representative.

The terms of reference of the executive committees had been circulated to Members with the agenda.

Witness 1 - Representing Primary Forum Executive: Manjit Bringan (Chair of the PFE) and Veronica Shepherd (Member of PFE)

The following points were made by Manjit Bringan and Veronica Shepherd during their presentation and in response to questions from members of the Committee:

·            The focus of the PFE was to get the best outcomes for all children, regardless of the type of school they attended.  In general, parents did not understand the different school types.

·            Headteachers of maintained schools considering conversion questioned "what's in it for us?" and were looking at whether they needed to formalise partnerships with other schools.

·            Headteachers of academies represented on the PFE felt the relationship with the local authority (LA) was not as positive as it could be and would like the relationship to be closer.  They used most of the services provided by the local authority, and considered Children's Centres, LADO and Safeguarding to be the most useful.  They would like the relationship with the LA to be more than a statutory one.  The greatest challenge they identified going forward was the financial constraints that all public sector organisations would be suffering.

·            PFE members acknowledged that it was difficult for the LA to develop a strategy for supporting conversion when government policy changed and funding arrangements were unclear.

Witness 2 - Representing Hillingdon Association of Secondary Headteachers Executive: Kim Rowe (Chair of HASH)

The following points were made by Kim Rowe during his presentation and in response to questions from members of the Committee:

·            20 of the 22 secondary schools in the Borough were academies.

·            There was a lot of interaction between HASH members and the LA.  HASH described the current relationship between academies and the LA as "positive but arm's length".  It acknowledged that the LA provided both statutory and non-statutory support that was vital to schools.

·            As the LA's role in schools had diminished as a result of the government's academisation agenda, the Borough's secondary schools had become more collaborative. Working jointly, schools and the LA had developed innovation and improvement networks and tended to exchange expertise and experience rather than draw upon the LAs school improvement work.  The level of support and challenge provided by the LA to HASH members was limited, which HASH felt was also due to all the schools being OFSTED good or outstanding.

·            HASH concurred with the PFE's view that any school's primary consideration was the children it taught.

·            Maintained schools needed support from the LA to convert.  Some maintained schools perceived academisation as the school being 'taken over'.

Witness 3 - Representing Schools  ...  view the full minutes text for item 49.

The Committee considered a report on the draft revenue budget and capital programme of the Children, Young People and Learning Services for 2017/18, along with indicative projections for the following four years.  The proposals had been considered by Cabinet on 15 December 2015 and were under consultation.  The Cabinet would consider the budget proposals again on 16 February 2017 and the report would include comments from the Policy Overview Committees.  Following that meeting of Cabinet, full Council would meet on 23 February 2017 to agree the budgets and Council Tax for 2017/18.

Members were reminded that the report set out the headline draft proposals, which were under consultation. Where savings to existing services were proposed, alternative service delivery models would be worked up and impact assessed before Council confirmed the budget.

It was reported that:

·            The Council had entered into a multi-year settlement which would require the Council to find savings of at least £15million per year.  However, the Council still received a number of external grants, which could be reduced and therefore could have an even further impact on the budget.  The consultation was on a tough financial settlement with significant challenges.

·            The majority of the senior management team for Children's Services had been appointed.

·            Recruitment of social workers was still a significant national challenge, although there had been successful recruitment campaigns in South Africa with a plan to change focus to Canada.  The cost of agency staff continued to increase and direct recruitment would produce savings.

·            The Council had improved its predictions for the number of children coming into the system.  Numbers has stabilised and reduced slightly.

·            There were approximately 100 unaccompanied asylum seeking children in the Borough and these numbers were increasing slightly.  Hillingdon had taken children from Calais.  London was above the government's National Transfer Agreement cap and should not take any more children, but in practice this was not happening.

·            The Council was looking at recruiting in-house foster carers which cost around half the cost of using agency carers.

·            The pupil population had gone up by around 850.  One primary school was seeking to convert to an academy.  The Borough had a healthy mix of school types with some more successful than others.

·            The Council would be implementing the government's increased early years childcare of 30 hours per week and had been allocated £3 million to support this.

·            The national funding formula was being introduced in April 2018.  Some schools stood to lose significant funding, although overall it appeared that Hillingdon would benefit.

·            The Council had received further information that day on School Improvement Grants.  The Council was currently consulting schools on a number of proposals within a very short timescale on the cessation of the Education Services Grant (ESG).

·            From 1 September 2017, the ESG would cease.  The Council currently received in excess of £2.5 million.  The finance model was complex and would have an impact on Council and school funding.

·            An area review of adult learning and further education colleges was taking place.  ...  view the full minutes text for item 50.

RESOLVED:  That the Cabinet Forward Plan be noted.

The Committee considered its Work Programme for the remainder of the 2016/17 Municipal Year.  Members observed that the agenda for the 14 February 2017 meeting looked very full, given that the meeting would also include the third witness session for the major review.

RESOLVED:  That (1) the work programme be noted;

(2)  officers, in consultation with the Chair, identify agenda items to move from the meeting on 14 February 2017 to later meetings in the Municipal Year.