Transcript

Please could I ask all attendees to turn on your microphone when invited to speak and to remember to turn off your microphone when you're finished. Please note that this is a council meeting held in public, not a public meeting. All marks should be addressed to me as the chair. Please note we're not expecting a fire alarm this test this evening, so if the alarm is sounded, please follow my instructions and exaggerate the building. As usual, each item will be introduced by an exec member, followed by an opportunity for other members to ask questions, and then an opportunity for members of the public to ask questions. Questions must be related to the items on the agenda deliberated. When the questions on each item are complete, I will move the agenda item to a vote. Once the vote has been taken, there will be no further discussions on that item. I would like to reassure everyone the exec members have read all the reports and appendix supplied for them for this meeting. I'd like to highlight to all present that this includes a letter from the company Child and Child, acting for the governing board at St. Jude's and St. Paul's School, which has been shared with the executive members. Please note that two of the attendees in the agenda pack this evening are exempt. However, these items are for information only, and the exec members have read these appendix thoroughly. I would ask members to ensure that they do not make reference to or ask any questions about any of the information in the exempt items. In order to facilitate members of the public who are here for the agenda items on the proposals for St. Jude's and St. Paul's C of E Primary School and Hybrid Quadrant School, I would like to propose to my colleagues on the executive that we bring these items forward on the agenda as the first items for consideration. Is that agreed? I've agreed to two deputations this evening, one from parents of St. Jude's and St. Paul's School, and another from a parent of Hybrid Quadrant. Are these people in attendance? They are. Welcome to John and Masood. You will have three minutes each to make an address to the executive. We will hear your addresses to the executive when we consider the individual reports. Finally, I've agreed an item of urgent business on the Finsbury Leisure Centre redevelopment, which requires an urgent decision from this evening's executive. This report was circulated yesterday. There are a few formal matters that I have to do first. Apologies of absence. I've received apologies from Councillor Bradford and Councillor Weeks. Declarations of interest. Does anyone have anything to declare? Item three. Can we agree the non-exec minutes of the last meeting and as a correct record, please? I agree. Item B5, proposal on the future of St. Jude and St. Paul's Primary School, pages 173 to 238 of the Agenda Pack. There is an exempt appendix accompanying this report on page 521 of the Agenda Pack, which exec members have read, which is for information only. Would John like to come to the microphone and address the executive now? Have I got that right? Good evening. I'm John Stansfield. I'm Vice-Chair for Governors at St. Jude and St. Paul's School. The following statement is supported by the school's leadership team, the governing body, the church council and the parent community. St. Jude and St. Paul's is not a failing school. We would ask the committee to refer to our written responses to the financial performance of the school and our recovery plan. Not only have we significantly exceeded our financial recovery plan for this year, we are also on track to clear the aggregate deficit by 2027, showing that the school is financially sustainable in the long term, while still maintaining higher standards of education that is always constantly delivered on. Ordinarily, when a school is put into consultation and that knowledge becomes public, new applications start to reduce. However, in St. Jude's and St. Paul's case, this has been the opposite. Reception first choice applications for the 25-26 academic year are up close to 40% from the previous year. Families have and continue to still trust this school and they are still choosing it, even with everything around it this year. To close a school that is stabilising and growing would be a serious risk. We proposed a financially sound job-saving merger with Hybrid Quadrant School at no extra cost to the council. That proposal was never properly tested. Instead, the council based its decision on the assumption that Hybrid Quadrant families wouldn't support it. But that assumption was never put to consultation and it is now being challenged by parents from both schools. This is a major decision with real consequences and it is being made on untested assumptions. That in itself carries risk to the process, the public trust and to the children and staff affected. Why choose the greater risk of closure when a viable positive option remains? Closing St. Jude's and Paul's won't fix the surplus places across the borough. Families are being signposted to Hackney and the funding will follow them out of Islington. Surplus places will remain, but a local school will be lost. And with it, the choice for families who want to stay and invest in local education. St. Jude's and St. Paul's is a Church of England school, chosen by families of all faiths and of none. Parents choose this school not just for its academic strength, but for its values which transcend all faiths, its inclusion and the way it nurtures every child. The school was founded to serve the whole community and that is exactly what it continues to do. We ask the Executive tonight to act with transparency and integrity and to acknowledge that the merger proposal has not been fully explored. We are calling for a four-week consultation with staff and parents. It won't affect the current timeline, but it will test the assumptions that these decisions have been based on so far. And it will show that the Council is generally open to alternatives. This is not a decision to rush. The case for closure remains contested and the risk of acting too soon is real. To close this statement, and in summary, this is a school which can demonstrate financial long-term stability, that has rising first-choice numbers and has an extremely strong community backing. Keeping St. Jude's and Paul's open would mean building on the progress that has already been made, choosing stability over disruption, hope over uncertainty. There is still time to listen and to lead responsibly and to choose a better way forward. Thank you. I'm now going to hand over to the Executive Member, Professor Safi Novongo. Thank you very much, Chair. Chair, I want to put in the records really for me to thank you the school, St. Jude and St. Paul school community for engaging during the long process we had because we started since last November in formal consultation for seven weeks and followed up by four consultations during representative period for four weeks. Just for me to put in context, we follow the DFE guidelines because there is a guidance about to have informal consultation which we follow and formal consultation during a representative period for four weeks we managed to follow that. It was a very good opportunity for us really to hear from parents, to hear from carers and for school community about this major situation we are facing is not only a little problem. It's a cause in London where the number of people is low and is still going down the hill. And with the current school budget is about the number of children according to the way that your budget is going to be proposed. It's a few number of children, it is going to damage the finance. And when the school does not have enough finance, it is going to jeopardize the quality of education. We need to highlight here about the quality of education if there is not enough money in school for them really to provide what they want to provide to their children. We received two proposals from the school. I'm going to take again this opportunity to thank you, the Church of Council, who proposed we received with regards to close Ivory Prudence School and to amigate it with St. Jude and St. Paul for it to be seated in St. Jude and St. Paul sides. Leader, this proposal, down the line when we're going to touch also Ivory Prudence, you're going to see it's completed. Both two groups want to keep them on schools and want us to close the other schools. And we didn't receive any strong proposal about how it was going to work. We heard very loud and clear across both two schools. There wasn't any appetite, because here we have to take into consideration about parental choice. There wasn't any appetite for parents from Ivory Prudence to close the school for them to go to the St. Jude's school, vice versa. That is the main reason, even this proposal, not clear how it is going to work, and are going to say it's not really being considered to be viable. We received a second submission from the school governor's body. It's about the long-term sustainability of the school. However, there was a lack of consistency between the forecast and the budget, because we couldn't really see the figure, couldn't match up, and this proposal also is not viable, Lida. That is the main reason the recommendation is not really viable across both two proposals we received. And I want to just to highlight, it's not a Clinton problem, it's across London. We have to put children first, and education of those children matters. With not having a good quality of education, lack of resources, it will go into jeopardy in the future. Thank you. I wonder if John has anything to add. Thank you very much, Lida, lead member. I just want to build on the two points that Micheline mentioned around the two proposals that John outlined for St. Jude and St. Paul's. The first one is around the amalgamation of both schools. What I would say is that that means there's an advocation for closure of one of the schools to make sure that they could then advocate, so therefore it feels like it's a conflicting proposal. And there are six reasons, that being the first. Bringing together two schools where each of them has a budget deficit, one being a hybrid quadrant of $447,130 in St. Jude. That would mean that with an amalgamation, although only one of those deficits would be carried forward, it would be the local authority who would have to then find that money for the deficit. The voice of the parents was actually quite powerful and clear when we went to the representation meetings. Hybrid quadrant parents were clear that they wanted a maintained school, and a number of parents of St. Jude's did reference that they had come from hybrid quadrant to St. Jude's. For an amalgamation, that would take a further year. This is a complex process. The legal status, the governance, the community and also land, because you are then dealing with maintained local authority school and also Church of England school. There is no further guarantee of pupil numbers, so that you are still dealing with the same critical, crucial issue of not enough young people. The second proposal that came through around the submission, rather than proposal from the governors, where we did test it, we did look at it, three points here. One is that they were based out on $42,000 of income, which when followed through, wraps around the send element, you could not see it as a working budget with sustainable figures working its way through. The second one is around a reduction of $90,000 in the budget, but what we couldn't see, based against patterns of spend, how and where that saving would take place. So you could see that the figures were thin. The third and final point is around the £90,000 income, around the Mildmay Trust of £90,000. What we did ask and were seeking assurance from the diocese was that they would provide a memorandum of understanding, underwriting that £90,000. We had back in writing that they could not, categorically could not, underwrite that £90,000. Just one point, I just wanted to clarify, Leader, if that is OK. John mentioned that first choice numbers for this year were up. Our records say, as the admission body, that there are 11 pupils. That is up 10%. That 11 pupils means there's a deficit of 19 pupils, if you're looking at a viable class, which is equivalent to approximately £120,000 shortfall. Thank you, Leader. Is there any questions from the Executive? Is there a question from the MP on this school? And I am only taking questions. I've got a number of questions. How can I do it? Can I put them all together or what? Just, I'd ask them one at a time. OK. The first one is, what consideration has the Executive or the Education Director given to the Child and Child letter concerning the Mildmay Trust, the money that it's put in and the fact that it hasn't ever put money into anybody else, as I understand it, and it is designed solely to support education in the area. And so it seems to me that this is being ignored when there is a clear source of income there that can be of benefit to the school. So it seems slightly dismissive, the way it's been put in the report. I will let the Director answer that. Yeah, thank you, Mr Corbyn. I think what I answered in that verse was that we tested that out, what we were seeking, and we don't dispute that there is that money in fund from Mildmay Trust, which does sit there. However, when we ask the Diocese for that assurance, that reassurance around the Mildmay Fund, it has to be sustainable to provide viability, the funding coming forward from that trust, which isn't part of the formula of funding, but is provided by that trust of £90,000. The Diocese, in writing, wrote back and said, we could not guarantee, we could not assure, we could not underwrite that amount. Therefore, it doesn't make it a viable proposition going forward. The other questions I've got. When was the first consideration given about merging the two schools? My understanding is that this has been discussed a long time ago, and then sort of put on the back burner, and has now resurfaced, because clearly we've got two schools in the same ward, working-class communities, high-needs kids, both proposed for closure next to each other. So the effects on the local community are quite devastating. What consideration has been given to that? In terms of the merger, which we would call an amalgamation, that proposal has not been put forward other than in this representation period. As you say, Mr Corbyn, schools have known about this with the consultation, then the representation period, since November 24. for that proposal to come forward. Even in this day, what we have is, we have two separate proposals from schools, but they're in conflict. So one states about, Highbury Quadrant would then say, St Jude's then merged with them on the Highbury Quadrant site. St Jude's would say, Highbury Quadrant then merged on the St Jude's site. Now that doesn't give the sound foundation for an amalgamation, which would then need a period of a year to come together. But that still fundamentally doesn't address the deficit, but also the pupil numbers. And that is part of the problem where there is a 27% vacancy rate. And we are seeing that both of those schools, St Jude's being the smallest school in the borough, and Highbury Quadrant, a reduction from being 422-form entry school to being less than, with their first choice numbers of about 13, will then be around about approximately 110 pupils. Do you accept that the future of the school being in such doubt because of the proposals has had a depressing effect on parents' applications for children to come there? But despite that, there are 13, I think, children already enrolled for reception class next year. Now, if this sort of Damocles wasn't hanging over the school, I've got a feeling there'd be an awful lot more children trying to go to that school. So, over a period of time, Mr Corbyn, the school's school role has fallen. So it was a two-form entry school with the 420 operating at 360 notional. That has reduced over a period of time before that consultation period. I think what we have to put in there as well is that the school requires improvement. It is the only school in Islington that does require... St. Jude's, I beg your pardon completely, so just retract that, that St. Jude's has got 11 pupils on their role for September and that is a reduction of, sorry, an increase of 1%, sorry, 10% from the previous year. My apologies for the error. The alternative schools suggested most of them are some distance away from St. Jude's and St. Paul's and therefore to take very young children excessive distances is difficult for them, particularly children with special needs and particularly if a family cannot get all their children in the same school adds to those problems. And you have referred in the report to Hackney schools providing an alternative, four more of which have just been announced yesterday for closure in Hackney in addition to the others they've already closed. So the Hackney option appears to be disappearing and the Islington options are not convenient or nearby. What future provision is there going to be for children and families in that part of Mildmay Ward where there's, you can't ignore it, closing Highbury Quadrant at the same time? There's going to be a long distance required for those children to be taking to school somewhere else. This nearby school, Newington Green, does not have a lot of spaces, does it? Thank you. What we have looked at, I think it's an important point, Mr Corbyn, you're absolutely right. What we have looked at is those distances. What we do see is there are 88% of the pupils from reception to year five who are and who do live within a 1.2 kilometre radius where there are vacancies within schools. There are 324 vacancies in Islington schools within a radius of about 1,600 metres. I recognise for some parents they will want that Church of England school. There are vacancies within that. We also have that responsibility but we also have the option to make provision elsewhere in church schools if we need to. But there are sufficient places in Islington schools for both schools. I'll take one more question because then I've got to ask your position as well. The last question from me is I realise the building is owned by the diocese, not by the council, but what consideration have you given to what will happen to that building in the future and the effect that will have on the local community? So that would be for the dioceses under their estate. Do you have a corporate director want to come in, Paul? Paul Senior. Paul Senior. Sorry, I asked. Thank you, Chair. And in following on from the comments of our corporate director for children's services and our lead member for children's services, I owe you that cover. this is incredibly difficult, incredibly hard. Having led parent engagement sessions at St. Jude's and St. Paul's schools recently with parents and carers and staff associated with the school and seeing the pain and seeing the challenge and seeing the pressure that this will present for them. It's incredibly hard we recognise that. So this is not an easy decision for consideration by the council. but just coming back to some of the points that John has already covered regarding our, in terms of future use, obviously the diocese will make an informed decision how they wish to proceed with the use of the building. Obviously we have a good relationship with the diocese that we would hope to be able to work with them to try and find something suitable for the locality. The local authority has sufficient places in schools locally to ensure sufficient provision and all children, young people wishing to find a place in an Islington school can still be accommodated. And at the same time everyone is aware of the news that's gone on in Hackney as well. I understand the school closures that are impacted by Hackney will have no direct impact on the localities that we're in scope for this conversation. I'm going to take questions from the opposition. Thanks, Monestas. Thank you, Chair. I'm just going to ask the Council to make financial and educational sense. So, in the papers it states that the Council has got imperative to reduce surplus capacity and secure efficient primary education. What we do need is well-funded education. The school is on the border with Hackney. Because of parental choice there's a real possibility that by closing the school that Islington will lose out on hundreds of thousands of pounds of funding. Surely this will not help secure efficient Islington primary education. John, do you want to answer that? Oh, Paul. Sorry, Paul's got his name. Thank you. And that's a question that, if I'm rightly thinking, came up in the informal consultation phase for both schools in the autumn term. Also came up in the representation phase so it's not a new question, it's a relevant question. Parental choice will be key here because parents will seek to find a school placement that's best positioned in response to their personalised needs so the local authority has no jurisdiction in terms of determining where parents will wish to take their children. Naturally, we have sufficient school places. Hackney, Islington will seek to keep as many children as possible in Islington schools and we do feel we have enough places but in terms of the modelling around that with officers have undertaken modelling looking at the addresses where our children live and those potentially to be affected by this and feel there are sufficient places in neighbouring schools should parents wish to do so but absolutely it goes without saying that some parents may choose to take their children to a Hackney school and vice versa on the back of school closures what may be going on in Hackney some parents in Hackney so I may wish to take their children to Islington schools we have no crystal ball we have no idea but what we will do is ensure that we use best endeavours to engage families as soon as possible I think we've got some provisional dates organised in May in the event that the decision is made to proceed to this process to engage families as early as possible in the process for those children with SEND for those children without SEND and for those families to have bespoke conversations to ensure that they're aware of their options and pathways for finding a place that's best positioned to their knees in an Islington school sorry just to go back and just get clarification is there a possibility that hundreds of thousands of pounds will not go to Islington schools because of this decision and potentially will go to Hackney yeah thank you I think the league member did state and Estes that this is a London issue and what we do recognise is that currently we have 560 surplus reception places based on census data in October which is the equivalent of 3.6 million lost in school revenue that equates to 18 empty classes and that vacancy rate is 27 what we do know is that two years ago when we begun the school organisation plan that there was a heading for 15 million pounds of overspend deficit within our schools by reducing obviously pans but also having to make the decision to close or amalgamate schools we have reduced that but you can see that pressure still remains there so yes there could be potentially some of that funding loss but as Paul did say Hackney and Ism to make those decisions parents will dictate that choice and move where spaces are but I think in the great scheme of things you know with 17 schools potentially heading for deficit we need to make sure we act responsibly and manage the estate I'm just going to give the other opposition sitting on the bench a chance do any of you want to speak Caroline now I'll give you thank you just to follow up on that and this is what I've asked for you to make financial and educational sense in the papers it does say that the school organisation plan phase 3 is going to cost almost 1.5 million pounds I'm assuming that includes absorbing the deficits of the schools and the total schools balance is about 1.5 sorry it's less than that so again I'm not entirely sure how closing these schools right now with this urgency makes financial sense is there a question there I didn't get the question yes the urgency is the question so proceeding right now is going to cost us about 1.5 million pounds whereas our surplus sorry have you read the papers did you not listen to the exec member this is about children and numbers of children in these schools so what is the question so again we know that well funded schools are efficient schools and we would like the children to stay in Islington in well funded schools so my question is with the rush to close the schools if we postpone this we potentially could explore the situations that have been suggested but also make sure that we don't spend that 1.5 million from our budget right now yeah I think what you're missing there is that you need to have at least 27 pupils within a class for a class to then be viable what we've alluded to here is that there are 11 pupils signed up in reception for September therefore there's approximately 120,000 shortfall just in their working budget if you then look at the other school where there are 13 pupils that again equates to 100,000 the working budget doesn't stack up so therefore cumulatively that again would be irresponsible of the council if we didn't act to manage the estate appropriately I'm now going to move and ask is there any parent of St. Julius and St. Paul's that wants to ask a question sorry if you'd like to come forward to the mic please okay the merger proposal with hybrid quadrant was dismissed on the assumption that hybrid quadrant families wouldn't support it but that assumption was never tested in consultation why was one of the only cost neutral alternatives rejected based on guesswork thank you thank you thank you chair and thank you to the parent who attended all of the parent engagement events going back to the informal consultation period and the recent parent engagement sessions giving up so much of her time and asking some very very relevant questions during those sessions with regards to that proposal the suggestion I think the corporate director mentioned earlier it may well have been the lead member apologies it was one of the two that when officers undertook the recent parent engagement sessions at both schools I think it was made very clear anecdotally that there wasn't an appetite in the main from sufficient hybrid quadrant parents to go the other way in fact there was anti in terms of I think in the main again not wanting to go to a religious based school so yes you could say that in terms of modelling and actually stress testing and going through the process that information was very very helpful but in terms of a process of amalgamation there are statutory processes there are statutory timelines with regards to potential amalgamations of a process and obviously the diocese is being engaged there is insufficient evidence to our council to conclude with confidence that an amalgamation would be viable and an amalgamation will actually bring more children to avoid and fortunately having to consider what we are considering this evening thank you I'm now going to ask the exec members was there another parent from St. Julie sorry hi only two of the 13 schools are listed as alternative church of England schools and just one of those schools within one and a half miles of centuries in St. Paul schools how are Church of England parental choices being protected if most alternatives in Newington don't offer the same ethos sorry I found that slightly hard but I think let me just play it back there I think what you're saying is parental choice for Church of England school has been reduced if you close St. Jude's and therefore what are the other options is that great sorry sorry I wasn't there so there's only two out of 30 schools are Church of England schools in Newington and only one of those a mile and a half in that radius so how are you going to propose alternatives for parents thank you thank you I think what we have a responsibility to do is a legal one is to provide a school place for a child we recognise for some of those distances for us I went and said the 88% of pupils in St. Jude's are within 1.2 radius of other schools depending on where you live if you then travel that 1600 metres there are other church schools in Islington that do have spaces once we know where they are we will be able to declare those but what we have to recognise is the changing nature of London means that there isn't a community school or a church school just around the corner we've seen a huge reduction again on this year 7% reduction in reception numbers in inner London mean that the viability and sustainability of particularly church schools has reduced however there are options there are vacancies and there is sufficiency and provision for parents for church schools if that's what they prefer So it's still about equal access to church schools because according to the council's own figures it shows that there aren't enough church of England school places within walking distance in Islington to cover all of St Jude's and St Paul's pupils there's shortfalls in at least four year groups and two of the free schools that were listed to us as alternatives are actually in Hackney so how can the council justify closing a local church of England school when it can't guarantee that nearby church of England school places within the borough for our children that it displaces Thank you So there are London again has porous borders what we do know is that across in Hackney there are vacancies in church schools as well as we have vacancies in Islington as well As I've stated we've seen that the numbers of requests for us and what we seen as church schools in Islington has reduced so it is the smallest school but we can guarantee a place for each and every young person in an Islington school that is our legal duty around that sufficiency and provision I'm now going to ask the executive can we agree recommendations 1.1 to 1.5 on pages 173 and 174 of the agenda pack and note the exempt appendix please all in agreement all in agreement thank you I want to thank the parents of St Jude's and St Paul's I'm going to pause now in case anybody does want to leave the chamber before I take the next item I'm going to now move to B6 proposal on the future of hybrid quadrant school pages 239 to 344 of the agenda pack this item has an appendix accompanying this report on page 767 of the agenda pack which exact members have read and which is for information only I believe I have another deputation deputation is it thank you thank you my name is Meshud Sikta I'm speaking on behalf of hybrid quadrant primary school encompassing our families, staff and most significantly our children we're here today because our school is threatened with closure jeopardising the future of our community the proposed closure of hybrid quadrant school is predicated on information that is erroneous, deceptive and in certain aspects potentially unworthful we have yet to see any evidence showing that it is in the interest of pupils of hybrid quadrant to have the school closed under the equality act 2010 religion or belief is a protected characteristic community led surveys have estimated that approximately 73% of pupils are muslim while the figure was not officially collected in the school census it has been echoed consistently in consultation responses and public meetings dismissing these concerns due to the absence of department for education mandated religious data does not meet the standard required by public sector equality duty which is to take due regard of the actual and potential impacts on protected groups despite the council's position that other secular schools exist in Islington the closure of this particular secular school which has served as a trusted and culturally sensitive space constitutes a significant and disproportionate impact on families who may face barriers to access and alternative schools including faith-based schools that may not reflect their values the report uses the statutory two mile walking limit to justify closure due to the availability and type of schools in the locality our children will have no choice but to travel more than two miles to find a suitable school and the flawed financial assumptions in the report so community proposals that may have merit have been unfairly rejected if the council was serious about not wanting to close the school support should have been provided to explore these options to make them potentially viable rather than expect an inexperienced parents to put proposals together while hybrid content does have a deficit position and whilst we do not want other schools to close there are other schools in the borough with greater financial difficulties and if there was a school to be put up for proposals surely if the deficit was a reason for closure the other schools would have been put forward on the list in the conditions building report states that the school is in a generally satisfactory condition the two million pounds quoted is for a period of 15 years and not all the work required is urgent short-term savings versus long-term costs displacing vulnerable children to new schools may increase demand on SEND budgets school transport mental health services and support staff costs that offset any potential immediate savings where has that been factored in questionable demographic forecasting so the GLA predictions used to justify school closures are just estimates they don't account for unexpected population shifts housing developments or future surges in demand previous closures of school closures may have already addressed the surplus capacity while other schools closing nearby e.g. St. Jude and St. Paul's it's possible that the surplus was already being used and reduced making this closure premature process and fairness concerns pupil preference and well-being not being prioritised families have reported that their children feel safe known and happy at High Bacodernal Primary School this emotional security wasn't given enough weight in the decision making process community engagement was strong but it was ignored despite 80% of the consultation opposing the closure the council still moved ahead in the proposal this raises questions about whether the public input was genuinely considered in conclusion closure should be an absolute last resort the council has not demonstrated fully and transparently that all options have been thoroughly explored GLA projections are useful but they're not certain they should not be used as a sole basis for shutting down the world of school especially when community has proposed other solutions and demand shift could change in a few years the federation options community-led rescue plans need to be transparently costed and independent impact assessments should be published you need to also review again the equalities impact assessment as it potentially discriminates against Muslim families we respectfully urge you to reject the school proposal closure thank you thank you councillor Sathina Gongo can you introduce this report please thank you very much Lidza I'd like to say thank you to my school for representing Ibrick Rodans and also to parents and Ibrick Rodans community schools Lidza before I go through my introduction I want just to draw the attention of the board this process is nothing to do with religion this process is to do about the number of people in our school and also the deficit budget and we are in phase 3 in all those phases nothing to do with religion and we can see the amount of our religion settings is still across our Ipslington borough that means I want just to put it record this is nothing to do with religion and it's nothing to do with discrimination thank you Lidza Lidza our love just to carry on again as I said before is long process and we follow the DFA guidance for having informal consultations last autumn and following by four weeks representative periods we received four alternative proposals to closure three of them is from parents which I want to say thank you for all their effort energy and hard work to put the proposition together and the fourth one which is one of the three one is by a resident also put a proposition that mean we have four propositions proposer three from parent and one from a resident I think it will be a good idea for me to highlight what the proposal is about the first one is about the federating hybrid guidance from a school with another school galaspi school and I want to draw the attention of the border any federation is agreement between two schools or the school they want to federate we heard from galaspi head teacher galaspi school is not preparing to get in federation with ivory credit school you can see it been referred in page 3 1 3 in the paper it reads three different reasons why the school is not preparing to answer in this federation that you can see this federation has collapsed and is not really taking consideration as a viable proposal the second proposal we receive is about utilizing hybrid school spaces for community use and rent of income to generate three thousand three hundred thousand pounds to four thousand pounds additional income per year by renting out the classes leader again this proposition is not really giving us any details about any agreement engagement about who will going to be rented than school is just a list about different organization probably but it's not clear there is not costing that mean it's not really viable the third proposition we receive from parents is about merging St. Jude and St. Paul school in ivory present size that is why when I said before you can see there is conflicted one school asked us to close the other school to draw people to themselves as John managed to said it will be difficult for us to do this we heard clearly and loud from parents across both two schools either of them is preparing really to move to go to another school and is not really giving us any clear idea about the number how it going to add up the number because parent choices matters here that means again the proposition number three is not viable and proposition number four the one from the resident and the last one we received from regarding hybrid is about to close the current school the current hybrid and to open another new school which name hybrid new park primary school on the hybrid side as a local authority we don't have any statutory power to open any school to open any new school within the current legislation framework we can't open a new school we can't close hybrid presents and to open a new school on the same side we don't have any power to do so and also I want to draw attention to the board all those four proposals didn't get involved the school or the school governor body because when we approach the school governor body to question to have any clarification we realised the school governor body wasn't involved on both four propositions thank you leader do you want to add anything yeah thank you leader thank you lead member just a couple of points to come back to thank you for your representation I think the important point that you raised around indirect discrimination and the 73% Muslim pupils around a protected characteristic I think it's a serious assertion which I do refute I think all pupils who attend our schools across Islington we're diverse we're inclusive there are 147 different languages and dialects that are spoken across Islington so therefore I think for those 73% and for all of the young people at Highbury Quadrant improving those life chances and attending a good school is hugely important around that equality of access the other point I wanted to just go through was that the four proposals that did come through from the community and thank you for that they were all evaluated and tested around that viability the assumptions failed to meet the bar around that viability and sustainability I think the point that is raised around distance we have again I'm looking at it it's in the paper as well we have looked at a number of schools community schools that are within so 85% of Highbury Quadrant pupils families live within a 1.2 kilometre radius of which there are 25 vacancies per pupil within that 1.2 kilometre and as I've already referenced the changing nature of London schools is that there will not be that number of schools that are just around each and every one of those corners the four proposals and I talked at length in the previous school but around amalgamation there is a clear oppositional position around this because it would be predicated on one school having to close and then one remaining on that side so again not guaranteeing the pupil numbers it is hugely complex for the reasons I've stated voice of parents that hybrid quadrant very clear about secular school which was mentioned by the representation and also that point around deficits and sustainability cannot be lost over a period of time that notional deficit has been built up which is now at 447,000 the additional income around what could you do with the building what I would say is that there would need to be significant investment in the building to bring up to a commercial standard and the proposal looks at about £300,000 needed in reality when you benchmark schools and the income that they do generate it's between £60,000 and £70,000 so that list of potentials which weren't in that list couldn't be tested around that I think we've covered off the federation piece so I'll pause there Lita Anybody got any questions? I'm going to take the exec first and then I'll go to Mr. Paul Thanks that was a helpful report and it was really useful for you to go through all the proposals one by one I think I hadn't quite realised that actually an amalgamation requires one school to close so that was helpful I'm mindful and we've heard today that in hybrid quadrant in particular we've got a large number of pupils with SCND and I just wondered if you could give us some reassurance if we were minded to agree the recommendation would there be very strong transition plans put in place for those students and their families Thank you very much Chancellor Chapman I want to reassure you if the decision is closed about closure of hybrid quadrant we're going to have a clear plan to work with individual parents because we know the need of child A is different to the need of child B we're going to work alongside with them to make sure those children's needs have been met to the new schools and it's not only about transition we're going to follow them until they settle because it's not meant to bring them to after transition and relieve them no we have to make sure we wrap around all help and support for those children's needs we are aware about across the borough and this is another situation is across the country where we do have a higher number of children with sense that mean is it duty our duty to make sure those children they are receiving a good quality of education and as well as they are receiving much help and support they need it can be through transition and when they're going to settle in schools in case of the decision is closure we are planning to really to support them thank you thank you reference has been made to the number of children who come from homes the first language is not English and I think it's over 70% which is the highest of any school and also reference has been made to the large number of students that need SEND provision there this is a serious issue what consideration has been given to what is going to happen to them as they move to other schools that are not necessarily nearby and that community of students will therefore be broken up what serious consideration was given to that in terms of equality impact assessment and indeed the Equality Act itself I think the Executive Member did just answer that that if the decision is made that every child will go to a good or outstanding school in Islington there will be a place every child and I think most of us in this chamber that know the Executive Member does not just write off children if she follows children near enough from looked after to 25 to looked after the way she cares about children and she's just given assurance here and every every single person on this executive and even on the benches over there will hold us all to account to make sure that every child is in a good or outstanding school this is really important this is about our children and we all care about our children and I think she really has given assurances there unless you want to repeat it again that's fine yeah I'm happy to repeat Jeremy if that can help because our plan if the decision is about closure we're going to have a system in place to help those individual children and the approach is not to help them as a group because the needs of family A or child A is completely different to the need of family B or child B meaning we're going to work with family in individual needs level just to make sure they're receiving much help and support they need it can be regarding language English is my fourth language that means I understand the impasse of language barriers what is family needs that is mean if I put myself in the position of those parents I know they need help because of language barriers that means even when during consultation the main reason for us to have interpreters it was just to make sure parents are involved and they're understanding what we are doing we're going to follow them in the decision closure to make sure they're receiving any single help and support they needed the same things with special needs children we're going to work with individual child and individual families in case of the decision is closure as I was responding to Sheila it's not just about transition it's about how they're going to settle in because if we say just about transition it looks like you just move them and you put them no they're our future the future of the borough we have of these children and how they're going to receive help our sense group are really prepared because they have information we're going to work with the schools to understand the details needs of individual child and individual family for us to provide proper help and proper support depending of the decision this night I raise that not because I don't think children get the support they do I think they do and I think that's very good my point is that it's a community in the area of largely Bengali families that have used and supported that school for a very long time and it is absolutely part of the community those children aren't all going to end up in the same school they're going to be sent all over the place that sense of community is diminished my second question is on the building itself what consideration was seriously given to suggestions made some time ago of reducing the school usage to about half of the site and then looking for other uses of the site including renting out or whatever I heard the answer on that earlier but if your proposal to close the school goes ahead then what is going to happen to the site what is going to happen to those buildings what is going to the playground other site these are fair questions which everybody in the community wants answers to I'm going to let Paul Senior answer this Thank you Chair and thank you lead member and also thank you Jeremy for that question I think it's important that we recognise the importance that it's possible it's very possible that in the event that council makes a decision to go down the route of closing the school and local authority has to be proactive in matters such as staff engagement the staff engagement with our union colleagues has been really helpful in terms of preparing staff who may be at risk officers have also had to look at the potential implications such as send and officers also have to look at the potential future use of the evaluation it doesn't mean a decision has been made but it means that we have to be proactive in terms of considering all factors and all possibilities so I think when we did the staff engagement sessions our union colleagues were very clear it was necessary to undertake those decisions and those activities even though no decision had been made with the closure or not because we wanted to ensure that we were on the front foot and in the position of readiness and the building assessment and evaluation and process even though it wasn't as comprehensive as we would want to which will happen maybe at a further stage in the event that the decision is made to close the school the process has to begin somewhere so we could be delayed if not but for a range of reasons it was important that the council was proactive not just about staffing not just about the SCM not just about considering potential alternative placements for our children and young people but also the building as well so there are a range of factors where the council has to be proactive rather than reactive did you have your hand up to ask the question great thank you I've got a few questions but I'll take them at time first of all throughout this process the council has described it as a school places crisis but I'm very conscious that we've had many years of funding cuts and when compared to OECD averages our primary classes are much larger and we're spending less per pupil than many other economies would the council reconsider the description of this crisis as funding crisis and start blaming government instead of demographics yeah I think we put on record around the issue of inner London in particular where there is that dearth of school places if a class is full and we're talking about 27 upwards then they will receive that full quote of just over £6,000 primary school wise what we do know is that London itself has lost 50,000 people's children over the last few years which just goes to show that having a school estate that was the size it was 10 years ago is no longer sustainable there would still be the issue which is there aren't enough young people in our Islington schools inner London to make it sustainable and viable so therefore action has to take place thank you thank you just to follow up last meeting that we met our local MP made the case for specialistic funding from government for inner London to help our schools perhaps make it through the other side of what might be a temporary demographic blip it would be good to understand what representations the council has made to government about the need for more funding for inner London schools between that meeting and this one yeah thank you thank you for that question so two aspects here firstly I represent all London DCS's as the education lead so I have half termly meetings with the DFE last year this time last year a meeting was held with all London which included Ofsted DFE unions around the challenge of admissions and school roles and we came up with an action plan one was where we would present to and of course the DFE did sign up to that about reviewing the funding arrangements and mechanisms what I would also say is the chief exec self and Paul have met with unions we have talked through some of the challenges that do exist we recognise that it's not just an Islington problem but that we have and our chief exec will be chairing that meeting where we will invite chief execs education leads unions come together to just think about what that representation may be made to government great thank you it's positive you hear about that work just a change of tattling questions is it council policy that if a school gets an Ofsted inspection that's less than good that they rise to the top of the closure list absolutely not does anybody else want to answer Paul or John I would say we aim in Islington to all our children to have a good or outstanding school children deserve the best yeah thank you and I would echo your comments absolutely not any school that unfortunately isn't a position where we will have to consider going through a process of evaluation we look at a range of factors pupil numbers the finances the viability the building the capital the potential for future learners coming in so we look at the projections so we looked at the data for the learners joining these schools in September as also absolutely not just another follow up on that so on hold on one minute I'm going to let other people on the bench beside you speak but I think the lead member wants to add and I think my colleague from the opposition if they even check the record before 96% of our school being rated good or outstanding we had few schools need improvement we never closed them we wrapped them with help and support really to bring those schools to the standards we want to meet them if that it was the case I believe we could close all the other schools before they have been rated good or outstanding to be closed but we work with them we support them to make sure they are having a good offstage that is the same thing also when we knew ivory prudence wasn't having a good offstage inspection we wrapped them with help and support really to bring them to outstanding the answer is no and we are preparing to carry on to support all of our school because our children deserve a good quality of education has anybody else before I want to give everybody on the opposition a chance anybody else got a question or do you want to carry on go thank you as an observer it's absolutely true that most of our schools are good and outstanding and it's been true that as soon as a school goes under good Paul's Park was also a school that was then threatened with closure can you ask a question about what we're discussing tonight because if you read it I do say it's questions about the items we're discussing we're not going back we're discussing hybrid quadrants please ask a question on that school get to my next sentence so ask a question then I will the pattern is so if a good amount of weight was handed to the Ofsted rating in the process of looking at hybrid quadrant school but during the process the government have scrapped one word or two word Ofsted ratings as wholly inadequate and has a the council considered that in that process and b is the council not concerned by giving a large amount of weight to Ofsted ratings that they risk asking working class kids and working class schools to disproportionately face the blunt and the threat of closure whilst middle class schools it is I'm a bit shocked that you're in this chamber tonight when we're discussing schools trying to score silly party political points this is about deficit this is about numbers have you not been listening to what council and the gong go has said tonight I'm sorry I'm just going to move on is there any parent here from some hybrid question that would like to speak I'm I'm to take I'm going to ask questions it has to be a question hi hi hello I'm coming here because Mr. John says that there is a 25 vacancies per pupil in hybrid quadrant for hybrid quadrant kids we have 144 pupils on the report if you do 25 vacancies per pupil that's 3600 pupils let's say you remove year six we still have 120 students 25 vacancies per 120 students that's 3,000 vacancies per pupil for our school within 1.2 kilometers that's 0.75 miles away from where I live that in itself is very very big discrepancy because there is about 700 vacancies in the whole Islington and second of all how come I don't find a single one for my new reception child that is going to start in reception in September 2025 my child is schoolless right now because my first nurse will have a quadrant and he doesn't have a school so what is the 25 vacancies per child in hybrid quadrant within my 0.75 miles school ratio yes thank you thank you for your question and that's an important question what we what we put in that in that report and you saw that that number what we have we have a duty to do and what we haven't you said there were 700 vacancies is what I've added up as I'm not included a couple of those schools 324 vacancies and they're within that sort of 1600 metres radius what we have is that duty to make sure that we provide a school place for every young person within hybrid quadrant and we have that sufficiency and vacancy as I said we have that across across Lyslington what I've itemised there is that within that 1600 metres there is provision and there is sufficiency thank you I mentioned earlier how we were incredibly fortunate to have a number of passionate committed parents attend our parent engagement sessions at the school during the process and the parent who's just made a very very passionate effective representation regarding her personal situation was one of those who engaged so proactively and positively with the process and when we talk about that number of vacancies there's 25 vacancies the data tells us within 1.2 kilometres of each pupil address not all of these people live in the same place as our speaker just now so you can't multiply 25 by the number on roll it's obviously how you wish to cut the number but it's inappropriate to measure it that way chair given the potential legal ramifications are you genuinely comfortable as an executive to vote on the recommendations of a report which is riddled with inaccuracies and disingenuous statistical information are you genuinely happy to vote on that report I mean hi I'm Victoria I'm the chief executive of the council so I think in broad terms if I just talk broadly about all of our executive reports the reason they come forward they're based on data evidence they're based on clear financial implications they're based on legal advice they're based on the relevant equality impact assessment so actually we have a responsibility as officers and some of us with very particular statutory responsibilities to put clear transparent decisions in front of the executive in order for them to make decisions is there any other questions from parents of hydrocarbons so the member Sapin Nogongo said earlier on that it's not about religion but do you accept that the council's report ignores the religious makeup of hydrocarbons it just dismisses it completely but it does exist so and on that basis can you believe that you're on the right side of the equalities act for 2010 and yeah that's my question are you on the right side of that when you're ignoring that religious makeup in school yes I want to just to reassure Becky everything we are doing we are taking equality act even our my colleague executive member of equality think she keep an eye about everything we are doing to make sure equality act is being followed up at loop as I said before what we are doing is nothing to do with religion nothing to do with race is not to do with religion is not to do with race what we are doing is about people number as well as finance nothing to do with religion equality act we are taking it with much consideration but this is nothing to do with equality act this is a question for Mr Senior it was quoted to say that the school wasn't fit for purpose hybrid quadrant I've tried my best to find where that come from if you could deny me thank you and that again thank you because you did attend a number of engagement sessions as well going back to the autumn term the engagement sessions we held there and the representation and I think the same question came up on those occasions as well which responses were provided as well as part of that we are aware that the building is in a state of disrepair ideally we would want all the children some children to attend a good school not just in terms of the environment the building but obviously quality of practice teaching and learning and actual outcomes as well one only has to make an assessment by looking at the building and evaluating the building when you compare with other residents and schools it is not at the level that we would want it to be so my answer remains the same now as it did when I answered that same question in the representation period engagement session and also when I answered the same question in the informal consultation phase in the autumn term so the report from Faith and Gould then where they said the building is satisfactory doesn't come into it by comparison with other Islington schools and the future investment that would be required to bring that school up to a level of sustainability and suitability to ensure that all Islington children attending that school have access to an environment that is conducive to teaching and learning and delivering the best possible outcomes by comparison absolutely it would not be in the same level I'm guided by my capital colleagues on this as well and I think in terms of we can conclude with confidence that the building is not in a position when compared with others that we would want our children to be attending as effectively as possible Is there any other questions Is that you saying the building is dangerous? Thank you for that question Is there anybody else who I've got to be fair? Can you pass the mic to the building? My question is how do you know that our quality of teaching is not good? As a teacher who is here with multiple of my fellow colleagues I know my teaching is good I'm a phase leader I know how much progress the children make How can you sit there as someone who has not seen any of our teaching and say that we do not provide quality of education for our children We do value the work that's going on by teachers support staff all the staff parents in supporting young people with their education but we can't hide from the fact that a Nocstead report has judged the school with requires improvement if you look at the trend in standards over time they fall below the national standard the expectations we would want all of our young people to be ascending as good school but also reaching at least the quartile in London so our challenges around that the report is factual but that's notwithstanding the work and contribution you as an individual and as a team do do Sorry we've had the question answered did you want to quickly come in thank you chair and just the point of clarity we have some outstanding staff working in Highbury Quadrant School my point was on about the quality of teaching quality of practice the outcomes and as John has said the Ofsted report is there in the public arena for many to see all of our schools have an Islington professional partner which is in essence a school improvement partner who works with our schools to look at quality of practice and teaching with a view to helping when necessary to try to make improvements to try to ensure that our children are receiving the best possible education as possible unfortunately the Ofsted report within the regulatory framework makes some clear comments my comment wasn't about the quality of your teaching or any individual teacher the Ofsted report is quite clear along with the judgment I'm just going to take one last question you said earlier it didn't matter it doesn't matter about the Ofsted report you went to great lengths to say it doesn't matter and now you're raising it as a reason for closing it that wasn't a question I think you made an error there I haven't said that at all sorry in a discussion earlier with the councillor you were saying that it was the teacher raised this the teacher raised it that isn't a question I'm not going to take any more questions now I think I've been really fair here with questions sorry did you want somebody that has an answer so I'm a SEND co at hybrid quadrant primary school and an assistant head there too you state that every SEND child will get a place in a good outstanding school in Islington already I am witnessing that that has not been happening for many of the SEND children whose parents have wished for them to move especially EXC children they have been rejected by schools which have impacted on both their parents and their pupils emotional needs how can you guarantee that all of our SEND pupils will get schools of their choices that will cater for the specific needs if they're getting rejected like I said before not just that pupils who have left how will you make sure that their behaviour and if they've got high SEMH needs that will not impact on other schools what are the resources that will be provided for them how are the schools going to cater for their needs thank you thank you for your service and thank you for your commitment to the education system it's passionate and committed staff and teachers and leaders like yourself who make a difference every day so I do thank you for that with regards to the learning from phases one and two the school organisation programme we are in phase three the same question came up actually the same question how can we guarantee how can we guarantee some parents are making a decision prior to a decision formally been made by the school to actually move their children or inquire we would always say that until any decision has been made we have advocated that parents should try to keep their children at the school and then we will look at a managed process and a managed process as part of a carefully evaluated plan leads to working with schools to create necessary additional spaces where necessary if need be to use local authority statutory powers as well to increase published admission numbers in schools as well so if parents are seeking to move prior to any informed decision being made then they will be met with the figures of this is the places this is availability this isn't not sequencing lies as I've said earlier the plan is that we will begin engagement sessions our SCN department working with your good self and other staff at the school to work with those families to try and secure appropriate placements in appropriate provision but if parents were to have moved or consider moving before any formal notification or decision as with tonight then they would have been met with a decision that this is availability based on our published numbers schools do have capacity to scale up published admission numbers and the local authority does have capacity to increase numbers in schools as well so the process will kick in should I say in the event that a decision is made tonight along the lines of implementing the proposal can we agree recommendations 1.1 to 1.4 on pages 239 and 240 of the agenda pack and note the appendix please that is the second item of schools I'm now going to keep a five minute comfort break because I've got a lot of other things on the agenda and I would like to say for anybody that's attended tonight thank you for your input in this Councillor Chapman the local initiatives fund thank you chair this won't take long I don't think I just want to I can do them one by one you can do them all together all right so we've got reports this evening on local initiative funding on our Islington Council community chest fund and on our discretionary rate relief policy members will be familiar with what all those schemes are the recommendations are in here in relation to local initiative funding I'm asking the committee to agree that we can administer local initiative funding next year in the way that we have done this current year so that's broadly 13,000 per ward for ward members to distribute very broadly to organisations that benefit their residents they can carry forward no more than a £1,000 underspend so I'm asking for you to agree that we can go ahead and do that and also to note the funding decisions that I've had a careful sight of and which officers have scrutinised and continue to monitor note the funding decisions which are appended to the report so that's one thing I'm asking you to do in terms of community chest you'll know that that's our partnership fund that we work together with Cripplegate the report asks and I would recommend that we agree to commit £190,000 for next year 2025-26 this is a great fund that Cripplegate contribute to and help us administer I chair the decision making panel and we're able to support lots of grassroots voluntary community sector organisations doing really terrific work across the borough so I'd like to agree for the one renewal of the scheme your commitment of £190,000 of council funding towards the scheme and to note again the decisions that were made by the panel in the last year that's a panel I chaired and which is very diligently run by Cripplegate thirdly is our discretionary rate relief policy you'll know that as a billing authority we're able to grant relief to PCS organisations so that they don't have to pay business rates that's one of the ways we can help support our voluntary community sector that we know do great work and are operating in a very difficult environment we have already so we forego income that organisations would otherwise have to pay we've already foregone income up to the maximum amount up until March 2026 so what I'm asking you to do is to note all of the awards of discretionary rate relief that we've granted in this last round that will run until March 2026 I'm asking you to agree that we can review how that scheme operates very keen to keep on with the scheme but look at it and look at how we can make it effective so that when we get to 2026 moving forward we can work with our VCS organisations to continue to offer that support to them thank you I'm going to take the vote on each item but before I do that I'd just like to give a thanks to our 151 officer for all the work on the discretionary rate relief that he's done and really want that on record and also to our partners Cripplegate for the joint partnership that they do with the community chest but now I will take each item unless anyone's got any questions so the local issue fund first 1.1 to 1.5 on pages 9 and 10 of the agenda pack can we agree B2 discretionary rate relief pages 75 to 1 over 8 of the agenda pack can we agree and the council's community chest in partnership with Cripplegate on pages 109 to 142 can we agree thank you thank you sir I'm now going to move to item B4 the corporate performance update councillor thank you very much chair in these very difficult financial times for the council it's really important that we very carefully monitor all of our performance across the council to make sure we're as efficient as possible so we can keep on delivering those vital services for Islington Residence there's a lot of strength in this report 720 residents have been supported into work 122 new apprenticeships starts very proud that our percentage of calls answered is at its highest rate to date about 89% just short of the target of 90% more residents are using bright lives and our number of households and temporary accommodation is below the London average working very very hard on that that said chair there are also big areas for improvement in the report as well the household recycling rates persistent absence in education employment and training and our target for new green space needs work as well also there's some work we've done on resident satisfaction and resolution at the first point of contact and also delivering secure cycle parking facilities so a lot done chair but a lot to do any questions can we agree recommendations on 1.1 to page 143 of the agenda pack thank you item B7 I believe you're delivering that as well councillor thank you chair similarly to my previous point chair in these very difficult financial times for the council it's very very important that we hold developers to account through our planning process we've got a really hard working and thorough planning team we've had great successes on this and this planning obligations SPD reiterates our requirements around employment and training local procurement genuinely affordable housing affordable workspace and accessible parking thank you any questions on this can we agree item B8 councillor Williamson yes so this is actually quite a light report I think to receive particularly this evening so this is a £3 million grant from the department of health for the drug and alcohol treatment and recovery improvement grant this grant is about supporting our drug and alcohol work and it really particularly focuses on our sort of outreach work particularly with people experiencing homelessness and work with the criminal justice system you will see in the report that there is a particular focus on people with opiate needs who are in the criminal justice system and it's working in partnership with services in that system I think really to put on record that Islington is actually one of only a really small number of local authorities that meet the annual delivery target for the office for health improvement and disparities across all adult drug and alcohol treatment needs categories and particularly in the criminal justice service and we also do get we've got national recognition as well for an increasing number of people that we have accessing particular opiate support as well so I just want to also put on record the fantastic work of our amazing public health team who are really fundamentally changing people's lives supporting them to tackle like opiate addictions and to actually make those changes in their life to support them for a really better future which I know is fundamental what this council and this administration is about we'll also agree in this chamber to pass our thanks on to everybody who does this work can we please agree recommendations 2.1 to 2.2 on page 458 of the agenda pack thank you item B9 councillor this is also again once again lovely to be able to present this this is our dementia strategy again I think a testament to us as a council and this labour administration council fighting hard for our residents and making sure that everyone is supported in this borough in the best ways possible so this is actually our first dementia strategy it's been worked with all of our partners so across our partners in health social care and in the community and voluntary sector it's had input from over 150 residents who have lived experience of them around dementia and also 120 professionals who work across the system to support people with dementia can we any questions sorry didn't see you sorry I'm directly behind the screen thank you for the support really interesting I do think one of the things that's mentioned is the type of dementia that's called Parkinson's or Lewy bodies which is a very specific type of dementia I'm conscious that maybe the report doesn't talk necessarily about some of the unique comorbidity in that space about the needs of people with Parkinson's who are experiencing dementia that are quite unique and maybe here or maybe another point it would be great to think about whether the council could do some specific thinking because one of the biggest problems with people with Parkinson's and dementia is them getting their medication on time in care homes and it is a really unique an issue close to my heart so I'd love to have a chat about it at some point well I'm happy to have a conversation but just I don't know if John there okay we'll come back to you we'll come back to you and have a conversation so can we agree recommendations 1.1 to 1.5 on pages 458 of the agenda pack now this so the last item this evening which I've agreed as under urgent business item G1 Finsbury Leisure Centre redevelopment I'll introduce this report which was circulated as a second dispatch yesterday as an urgent decision is required this evening in order to minimise costs incurred by the council in the connection with this project has anybody got any questions on the executive councillor great thank you at the last executive meeting the council was proceeding with the process of clarifying ownership of land and one month later we've got a decision to withdraw the plans it'd be good to understand what's changed in the last month and yeah it does feel like a 24th hour decision thanks councillor I think the report outlines quite clearly some of the decisions and in particular at the front of the report some of the reasons for urgency so one of those is the costs incurred per month I think one of the other moments that we've been going through is looking at the fact that we're about to move into stage 4 so the last executive report on Finsbury Leisure Centre redevelopment talked about internal gateways we were about to move from gateway 3 into gateway stage 4 and as part of our understanding and recognising the economic environment for which this would be a single large project gave opportune time to say actually I think we need to reconsider the risk environment and that's clearly laid out in the entirety of the report one quick follow-up Southwark council and a number of other councils put out a piece of research saying almost two-thirds of councils were at risk of abandoning house building projects without extra support from government and this feels like the manifestation of that warning what conversations has council been able to have with government about the lack of funding for building new homes since the publication of the report and this decision none has yet but this decision was clearly laid out in the report two executive meetings ago I sat here and the council had an agenda item where land was appropriated for the your colleague has just mentioned the land appropriation is it a question the chief exec has just actually answered that where we were we've decided and I did say it is to the cost now to minimise the cost to the financial risk of the council the land before we went to gateway four that had to be done so there's just clarification whether the land appropriated is that now not going to be followed through or is that going to be followed through I'm going to pass to the corporate director hi good evening it becomes mute effectively so if you remember it was addition in principle if the development goes ahead the development will not go ahead so the appropriation will not be required any questions from members of the public first of all I'd like to thank and congratulate the council on the sensible and very wise decision to drop this project I've just really got one question which is that given the leader's statement the public statement put out yesterday that the pitches will not only be enhanced but will also be protected given that over the last number of years since I think 2007 there have been three potential projects to build on these pictures could you give us an assurance that they will now actually be protected for the long term and what the nature of that protection might be yeah as I said in the do you need to turn off your mic sorry as I said in my statement yesterday we will redevelop the leisure centre we will protect the pitches and I'd like to the space around it which is open space the local space do as much as we can to make to enhance that area so when I said protected yes they're going to be protected nothing is going to be built on those pitches and we're going to work with community and the leisure to make sure that we get proper social value for the local people that use those pitches can I just ask what's the nature of that protection will be will it be like a legal protection or just a statement and principle statement and principle any other questions can we please agree recommendations 1.1 to 1.6 on page 1 and 2 of the second dispatch please agreed thank you very much there are no items other items to consider as that concludes the meeting this evening thank you the next meeting of the objectives on the 22nd of May