The Wandsworth Council's General Overview and Scrutiny Committee convened to discuss the proposed closure of Bradstow Community Special School in Kent. After hearing arguments for and against the closure, the committee voted to take no further action, effectively allowing the Cabinet's decision to close the school to proceed. This decision was made despite concerns raised about the impact on vulnerable children and the financial implications for the council.

Bradstow Community Special School Closure

The main item under discussion was the call-in request regarding the Cabinet's decision to close Bradstow Community Special School, a residential school for children with severe, profound, and multiple learning difficulties¹ located in Kent. The committee ultimately voted to take no further action, allowing the closure decision to stand.

Arguments Against Closure

Councillor Aled Richards-Jones, Leader of the Opposition, initiated the call-in, arguing that the decision to close Bradstow School lacked openness and transparency and risked being unreasonable. He highlighted that the Cabinet's decision was made without fully exploring alternative options, such as academisation², and that the Department for Education (DfE) had requested a pause in the closure process.

Councillor Richards-Jones also raised concerns about the council's assertion that the school was no longer viable, pointing to a business plan presented by the school outlining potential cost savings and increased revenue. He also questioned why Wandsworth Council had not recovered debts owed to it by Kent County Council and Surrey County Council.

Mrs. Sarah Adams, the principal of Bradstow School, addressed the committee, stating that the initial decision to close the school was made without key information and that the school's viability efforts had been blocked. She said that preventing new admissions had undermined the school's ability to remain viable, and that offers to purchase the school had been rejected without consideration.

Councillor Steffi Sutters voiced strong support for Bradstow School, emphasising the unique expertise and care it provides for children with severe and complex needs. She argued that Paddock School, a local school in Wandsworth, was not an adequate substitute for Bradstow's specialised residential provision and waking curriculum³.

Council's Rationale for Closure

Councillor Judi Gasser, Cabinet Member for Children, defended the Cabinet's decision, stating that it was an extremely serious and painful decision made with the best interests of Wandsworth children in mind. She explained that Wandsworth Council is committed to investing in local schools to support children with special needs closer to their families and communities, as demonstrated by the £41 million investment in local provisions like Paddock School.

Councillor Gasser stated that the need for placements at Bradstow had declined significantly over the years, with only one Wandsworth child currently attending the school. She also highlighted the school's dire financial situation, with an accumulated deficit of close to £1 million projected by December 2025. She said that Wandsworth Council had been supporting the school and exploring alternative arrangements for years, including a potential transfer to Kent County Council and academisation through the Cygnus Trust and the Bridge Academy Trust, but these efforts had been unsuccessful.

Councillor Rex Osborne supported the Cabinet's decision, arguing that the council's responsibility lies first and foremost with Wandsworth residents, taxpayers, and children. He criticised the previous administration for failing to address the financial issues at Bradstow and for allowing debts to go unrecovered.

Financial Considerations

A key aspect of the debate revolved around the financial viability of Bradstow School. Councillor Gasser stated that Wandsworth Council had been effectively lending the school money to cover debts owed by other local authorities, which she argued should be used for Wandsworth children.

Officers clarified that legal proceedings had been initiated to recover the outstanding debts from Kent County Council and Surrey County Council, but that these proceedings had been paused during negotiations. They also noted that recovering the debt was not straightforward, as it required evidence of every placement and item.

Councillor George Crivelli questioned the accuracy of the council's financial figures, pointing to a reported surplus in the 2024-25 financial year. Officers clarified that while the school had generated a surplus in that year, it was used to pay down an existing deficit, leaving a remaining deficit of £590,000. They also noted that the school's financial forecasts were subject to change due to various factors, including the number of children and staff.

Allegations of Predetermination

Councillor Richards-Jones raised concerns about a potential conflict of interest, citing Wandsworth Council's asset management strategy, which identified the Bradstow School site as a high-value site for alternative use, implying a predetermination to close the school and sell the land.

Officers responded that the asset management strategy was an internal document that had not been approved by the Cabinet and did not reflect council policy.