Save Our Schools

We are publishing the response we have had from the Council to a Freedom of Information request. Our brief comments are in red, the questions are in italics. Thank you for your email dated 29April 2009, in which you have requested amongst other things information about consultation on the Schools for the Future proposals. We have considered your request under the terms of the Freedom of Information Act 2000, and apologise for the delay in replying.

1. Please provide details of the consultation on the Schools for the Future proposals with Lambeth Council? ('Any LA likely to be affected by the proposals, in particular neighbouring authorities where there may be significant cross-border movement of pupils'... should be consulted)

During the first phase consultation on the secondary review, officers visited all neighbouring authorities. In the second phase leaflets were sent to neighbouring boroughs, including Lambeth.
Nothing in the plans indicates that Lambeth has either been consulted or had their views considered. This is the same as with parents, teachers, students and the public. "Consultation" implies listening, not completely ignoring.

2. Those making proposals to close a maintained school (in this case Croydon Council) should provide 'sufficient information'. Can you also provide evidence that the Council provided any counter information.

It is inferred that this part of the FOI refers to the secondary schools review, but it is not clear what is meant by “counter information”.
There is no obligation on the Council to provide a platform for self-appointed representatives of points of view opposed to its policies. The Council’s duties lie in ensuring that the general public and the stakeholders in the schools concerned have adequate information and opportunities to make their views known.
Croydon's representatives have repeatedly stated that making the schools into Academies would improve results. However, there is considerable research evidence that, without covert selection and higher exclusion rates, this will not be the case. Indeed neither Harris nor Oasis can demonstrate that they improve results. This is not the opinion of "self-appointed representatives" (how insulting is that?) but the view of the Government sponsored Pricewaterhouse Coopers review: "There is insufficient evidence to make a definitive judgement about the Academies as a model for school improvement."

3. Can you provide information on the costs of the whole consultation process: who money was paid to, for what and who funded expenses.

The Authority has ensured that consultation has included opportunities for the general public and the stakeholders in each school to be informed about the Council’s proposals and express their views. To this end, during the first phase of consultation Bryanston Square was contracted to work on the Council’s behalf and in the second phase Luther Pendragon was given the task. Total cost to date over the two years of consultation has been £178,086.
Presumably this figure does not cover the costs of Croydon Council staff time.

4. What evidence can the Council give that they have considered diversity and how do they consider that they have increased parental choice, rather than reduced it.

The Government requires that local authorities should make every effort to increase diversity and choice available to parents and their children. In practice this means increasing the range of school providers as well as securing diversity in the characters of local schools. Through the proposals contained in its secondary schools review, Croydon Council is seeking to bring about a range of high quality schools, each with its own distinctive character, comprising academies, voluntary aided, foundation, trust and community schools, which will provide increased choice to parents and children in Croydon.
Croydon Council has not carried out an Equalities Impact Assessment as required, neither has Lambeth Council. It is impossible, therefore, for them to state that they have considered diversity. What does happen if you want an ordinary, secular, community comprehensive school for your child? Diversity is not in the governance it is in the actual school.

5. Section 176 of the Education Act 2002 states that LAs and governing bodies have a duty 'to consult pupils are also on any proposed changes to local school organisation that affect them.' Please provide evidence that the latter was done.

The consultations have been inclusive of all ages and have included pupils and young people in the community. Pupils attended the consultation meetings at Haling Manor and Ashburton and a number took the opportunity to speak about the academy proposals. During the next phase of BSF development as attention focuses on the rebuilding and refurbishment of specific schools, the “student voice” will be an important and integral part of the education transformation process.
The views of students at Haling Manor were very, very clear: "don't change our school". However, they were very restricted in the time allocated to them.

If you are unhappy with the way the department has handled your request under the Freedom of Information Act, you may ask for an internal review. You can do this by outlining the details of your complaint and either
• e-mailing us at This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it
• faxing us on 0208 760 5679
• writing to FOI Complaints, London Borough of Croydon, Democratic and Legal Services, Croydon, CR9 3JS

If you are not content with the outcome of the internal review, you have the right to apply directly to the Information Commissioner for a decision. The Information Commissioner can be contacted at:

• Information Commissioner’s Office, Wycliffe House, Water Lane, Wilmslow, Cheshire, SK9 5AF


Yours sincerely


James Derby
Corporate Solicitor
Legal & Democratic Services
London Borough of Croydon
Taberner House
Park Lane
CR9 3JS
Tel: 020 8760 5768 Ext. 61359
Fax: 020 8760 5679