Consultation Under Fire

Way back in Winter 2008 I wrote in Brent Green News about concerns about consultation in Brent. As complaints multiply about recent consultations it is worth returning to the topic.

Brent Council's website states:

Consultations give you the opportunity to get involved with decision-making in Brent.

We consult with the public on proposals and plans and take responses into account when deciding our policies for the borough.

Many residents now think that consultations do not enable them to get involved in decision making - decisions have often been made before the consultation ends. Some major decisions are not consulted about at all. Residents often also feel that their responses are not taken into account.

Some residents thought that if  there was enough opposition to a Council proposal then it might be abandoned. Cllr Ruth Moher.  in the case of the adult day centres when users were overwhelmingly opposed to closure, clearly stated that this was not the case.

The question then arises about what the point of consultation is. A cynic may respond that it is to enable a box to be ticked in documentation - and no more than that. Let's look at some variations in consultation.

1. NO CONSULTATION - The Council does not consult at all but just goes ahead, often on the most important issues.  This includes not consulting on the principle of academy schools in the case of the Wembley Ark Academy. Consultation was about the plans and the name, not whether we should have academy schools. Similarly the Council did not ask whether Brent residents wanted a grandiose Civic Centre, but we could comment on the design. Currently the Council is going ahead with an all through school at Preston Manor without consultation on whether this type of school is wanted, again consultation has been limited to planning issues.
2. DECISIONS MADE BEFORE CONSULTATION ENDS - This appears to be the case with the closure of Brent libraries. The Council budget setting meeting, and Cllr Ann John herself, assumed the closures would go ahead despite consultation still having some days to run and no report available on the outcomes.
3. CONSULTATION NOT TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT BECAUSE OF THE NEED FOR SPEEDY DECISIONS - This is a new development and linked to financial deadlines such as the front-loading of cuts this year and the need to spend school places safety valve money before August 2011. In cases such as the Charteris Sports Centre and the libraries insufficient time is given to the search for alternatives solutions and the closures go ahead anyway. With school places there is not sufficient time to change the location of Preston Manor Primary School to reduce its impact on traffic congestion 'because the plans are already in place' and no time to discuss incorporating the Mission Dining Club into the new building at Newfield Primary School.The Council applied for planning permission for the Preston Manor Primary School before the Executive had considered submissions on the statutory consultation and approved it. 
4. HALF-COCK CONSULTATION/PARTICIPATION - The residents raising issues with the planning committee on Preston Manor had two site visits with the planning committee on which keys to the site were not available. On the last occasion some councillors wandered away while residents were trying to talk to them and one clambered back onto the bus.  A further problem has been the illegibility of poorly scanned documentation on the Council website. The library campaigns have taken up the inaccuracy of library visit statistics that formed a key part of the Council's case for closures and the figures on children without school places in the vicinity of Preston Manor have been challenged.
5. RESPONDENTS QUESTIONS/COMMENTS NOT ANSWERED - Again in the Preston Manor case some questions remained completely unanswered in the Council's response undermining the legitimacy of the decision.
6. PROPOSALS/QUESTIONNAIRES DISGUISING THE REAL ISSUES - The most obvious one here is the Library 'Transformation' Programme which some library users through was about redecoration and not closures! The Brent Magazine questionnaire on the Waste Strategy was less than clear that it involved a switch to fortnightly residual waste collection.
7. INFORMATION GIVING MASQUERADING AS CONSULTATION - The recent allotment 'consultation' on the rise in  rents was held after the Council approved the rise and when it had been announced before Christmas. Allotment holders were really just told why rents had risen in the context of the Council's financial difficulties and not asked whether they should have been put up or whether there were any alternative proposals.
8. RESIDENTS NOT INFORMED OF CONSULTATION - A regular issue, particularly with planning applications. It arose over Preston Manor when many residents living nearby the school were not told about expansion proposals. After initially saying that what they had done was adequate the Council did send out additional letters. Under the last administration similar complaints were made about the Wembley Masterplan.

All this really riles residents and contributes to a distrust of politicians. More importantly, it discourages active citizenship and participation at a time when local government needs all the friends it can get.

Preston Manor Travel Plan Deficient

The Travel Plan for the proposed primary school  submitted to the Council by Preston Manor High School ahead of the Planning Committee to be held on Wednesday was given a 'FAIL' by the council officers. Apart from missing detail there is some uncertainty about the geographical source of pupils. If the majority of pupils come from the local area this may have a destabilising impact on existing local primary schools. If they come from further away increased car traffic and congestion may be involved.

The Travel Plan is very light on detailed information for the school (e.g. general

background, assessment of existing transport network, policy review, detailing of the Travel Plan Co-ordinator’s role and detail around the implementation of the Travel Plan, such as an Action Plan and details of how it will be secured and funded). It is also missing some key measures, such as the operation of breakfast and after-school clubs to assist in staggering arrivals and departures and an on-site car parking management system (such as giving priority to car sharers).

A further major issue that has not been addressed in the Travel Plan is the proposed catchment area for the school. The Transport Assessment alludes to the shortage of school places for children in the southeast of the Borough, which could result in a large proportion of the future school roll initially coming from areas some distance from the school. This would make implementation of a number of the key travel plan measures, such as promotion of walking, very difficult and would require consideration of alternative measures, such as dedicated school buses from key population centres.

The Travel Plan has been assessed by the Council’s Highway officers using TfL’s ATTRIBUTE  programme and has scored a “FAIL” (29/83).

The applicants consider that although initially there may be a higher than usual percentage of children travelling to the site, this will balance out over time as the school's criteria for attendance becomes applicable. The applicants have therefore not anticipated that a dedicated bus route is necessary.

Fuming in the rain, just fuming in the rain...

Residents at the Preston Manor Primary School site

Brent Council hasn't covered itself in glory regarding the expansion plans for Preston Manor High School.

Initially it did not inform most of the residents of the plans, and then organised a consultation meeting at a time when most of them were still at work.  Its statutory notice documentation had to be revised three times due to inaccuracies and many of the planning documents on its website were so poorly scanned as to be illegible. Many questions raised by consultees were not answered in the expansion documentation that went to the Executive last week.

Damagingly the Council failed to make adequate searches ahead of the planning application and were taken by surprise when residents uncovered covenants that appeared to limit development of the site.  The Council fast-tracked the planning application so that it will be decided on Wednesday February 23rd ahead of a decision on the statutory application on Monday February 28th.

When residents queried why a site visit had not been organised by the Planning Committee a visit was hastily organised for Saturday morning.  However the committee turned up late on a rainy morning day and  did not possess the right keys for the site. This had also happened previously at the site meeting for the temporary primary school building in Ashley Gardens. According to one resident who attended, councillors began to drift off halfway through the proceedings and residents were left fuming when the chair cut off the discussion prematurely.

Perhaps not the best way to win hearts and minds?

Curious Consultations

When Cllr James Powney stated from the platform at the recent Town Hall meeting that 'There is no alternative' to the library closures, someone heckled, "Then why are you consulting us?" Other speakers were equally disenchanted with consultation suggesting that major questions were already decided ahead of consultation outcomes.

A little cynical you may think...

However there was a statutory consultation before the holiday on the proposed expansion of Preston Manor High School so that it will also provide primary education in the future. A report on the consultation outcomes will go to the council Executive on February 11th 2011 and they will decide whether to approve the expansion. Obviously they will approach the issue with open minds and take note of the submissions?

However this month the Council is consulting on a planning application for a new 2 form entry primary school on the Preston Manor High School site - to be decided no earlier than January 20th 2011. (An earlier date had been given but residents protested that consultation letters arrived late because of the Christmas post.)

When we queried why the Council was seeking planning permission before the Executive had discussed whether to expand the school, Brent Council told us:

"The Planning Application has been submitted in advance of the Executive approval to ensure that  the statutory proposal can be implemented on time."

I will leave you to decide whether the statutory consultation was genuine or just another exercise in ticking the boxes.

Is Big Really Beautiful?

As Cllr James Powney has recently accused me on his blog of trying to wreck the expansion of primary school places in Brent I thought it it might be useful to if I outlined some of the issues that concern me so that readers can make up their own minds.

There are currently many 4 and 5 year olds without school places in Brent and the borough has received 'safety valve' money to provide extra places. This money has to be spent by the end of August 2011 or it will be lost. As a result there are a number of schemes under-way to add extra classes to some primary schools and a proposal for a 2 form entry primary school at Preston Manor High School, creating an all-through 4-19 school of more than 2,000 pupils.

It is the Preston Manor expansion scheme and associated secondary expansion schemes that concern me. The Preston Manor proposal for a 420 pupil primary provision only emerged during August and the consultation has been 'stream-lined' because of the need to spend the money by August 2011. The quality of the consultation has been affected by the need to meet the deadline but also by the impact of staffing cuts in the department concerned and the restructuring which has transferred the department from Children and Families to Regeneration and Major Projects. These factors have resulted in one consultation meeting for residents being held at a time when most residents were still at work; local residents only receiving consultation documents after vociferous protests; a 'consultation' at the Wembley Area Consultation Forum where after a PowerPoint presentation by seven project managers and council officers, only three questions from residents were allowed; and documentation that has already had to be revised twice.

A major weakness has been the lack of educational input into something that represents a major change in local education provision. Instead it has been seen as simply an exercise in creating extra classes or buildings to house children. The Ark Academy in Wembley will eventually provide 'all-through' education from 4-19. Preston Manor is five minutes away from the ARK and in competition with it and now consulting on offering the same range of provision. In addition, Alperton High School, Wembley High School and Capital City Academy have all expressed an interest in expanding to include primary provision and others may follow. Nowhere in the consultation has there been a thorough discussion of the benefits and drawbacks of such all-though schools which will each have a total pupil population of  1,600-2,000 or more.

Nor has there been proper consideration of the impact of such provision on nearby 'stand alone' primary schools. Preston Manor intends to give preference for admission to its secondary school to pupils who attend the primary school. This would represent 25% of their Year 7 intake. If you add preference given to siblings already at the High School this reduces the chance of children from stand alone primaries gaining admission to the High School significantly. Canny parents will want to send their children to the primary school in order to secure admission to the secondary school. In effect this means choosing your child's high school at the age of four. There is a real danger that stand alone primary schools will be destabilised as a result, losing pupils and experiencing high pupil turnover as they cater for an increasing proportion of pupils in short-term transit through the borough. A major consideration should be how this will affect equal opportunity for access to quality secondary education in the borough.

A further consideration is that the proposed expansions, with the exception of Capital City, are all in the North of the borough while much of the demand is in the South. The Harlesden/Stonebridge area lacks a community secondary school and there have been moves by parents to set up a 'free school' there. 'All through' schools in the north will reinforce that basic inequality and further shift the centre of gravity of the borough to Wembley.

To its credit the council has recognised that the rush to expand may affect the quality of the new provision. They should also recognise that the quality and viability of existing primary provision will be put at risk in the long-term if all-through schools become the norm. A further imponderable is the impact of the housing benefit cap on local families with the Council's own senior housing officer predicting that many may be forced to more out of the borough. Indeed there has already been an increase in evictions resulting in more families moving out of London or into short-term bed and breakfast accommodation. If that trend continues we may see a reduction in the number of pupils seeking school places.

The Green Party is in favour of genuine all-through schools which would be smaller and where the form of entry would be the same throughout.  Small schools where the headteacher and staff  know all the pupils have huge advantages in terms of creating a caring, family and community centred ethos. Large schools may be able to offer a wider curriculum and more shared resources as well as economies of scale but lose a lot in the process and I question whether large institutions are good places in which to care for and educate young children.

Brent used to offer a range of sizes of primary schools from one to three form entry but the number of one form entry schools (210 pupils from Reception to Year 6) has been reduced as a result of expansion plans and there are now some four form entry schools (840 pupils) which are bigger than many secondary schools. This process has been taking place over several years and there are legitimate  arguments for and against  which deserve a public airing before 'In Brent Big is Beautiful' becomes our borough slogan.

It may be inconvenient to ask these questions but it is not a wrecking tactic. Important decisions are being made and parents, teacher, governors and residents deserve to be part of the discussion.

Governors Go Ahead with Preston Manor Expansion Plans

Preston Manor High School governors have decided to go ahead with the next stage of consultation on expanding the school to include children from 4 to 11 year. This will ultimately in crease the population of the school by 420 Reception to Year places to give a total population of 1980 places. The pupil entry for Reception will be 60 and for Year 7 252. If the plans go ahead the permanent primary provision will be opened in September 2011. However 60 reception age children will start in temporary accommodation at the school in January 2011.

The statutory notice confirms that Year 6 pupils attending the primary provision would be prioritised for entry to Year 7 at the secondary school.

The plans were opposed by residents at their consultative meeting and again by residents and others at the Wembley Area Consultative forum. Opposition is likely to continue at this statutory stage.

Although the notice says that the consultation period starts from November 4th, the date of publication, the full documentation was not available on the consultation website today.

Extract from Statutory Notice

Copies of the complete proposal can be obtained from: Nitin Parshotam, Head of Assets Management, Children and Families, London Borough of Brent, 4th Floor Chesterfield House, 9 Park Lane, Wembley, Middlesex, HA9 7RW.

Within six weeks from the date of publication of this proposal i.e. by 16 December 2010, any person may object to or make comments on the proposal in writing by sending them to Nitin Parshotam, Head of Assets Management, Children and Families, London Borough of Brent, 4th Floor Chesterfield House, 9 Park Lane, Wembley, Middlesex, HA9 7RW. Email: Consultations.schoolorganisation@brent.gov.uk

Brent Council forced to widen Preston Manor consultation

Following complaints from residents at last week's consultation meeting that they had not been written to about the proposal to expand Preston Manor High School into the primary sector, Brent Council this week circulated 4,000 letters to local people. At that meeting they had claimed they followed procedure and could not send out lots of letters.

There was a further consultation at Wembley Area Consultative Forum on Wednesday which succeeded in producing more confusion rather than clarification. Half a dozen men from Brent Council, Preston Manor High School and Watts the project managers stood at the front of the hall next to the screen as a power point presentation was made. ("How many men does it take to do a presentation?" came the whispered comment behind me.)

The presentation included the claim that there were 72 reception aged children out of school 'in the area of Preston Manor'. This was slightly different wording than the 'immediate area of Preston Manor' claimed at the previous meeting, but I pointed out that we had already been told that this meant the whole of HA9 and HAO, which clearly includes children a long way from Preston Manor. One of the presenters said that there had been confusion about whether it was an 'all-through' school or not (without mentioning that this was a confusion stemming from different descriptions in their own two consultation documents) and claimed it was not an 'all through' because the primary building was some distance from the secondary school and separated by playing fields. In fact 'all through' is a matter of whether the primary and secondary departments have one overall management structure and one governing body - not their proximity.

A question asking what the catchment area of the new new primary school would be ('catchment'  is a geographical concept which allocates particular streets to particular schools - you can find your street on Brent's website and see which school is allocated to your children) was answered by reference to the over-subscription criteria and the priority in which places would be given - not on whether the new department./school would have its own catchment area. All Brent community primary schools, with the exception of Sudbury, have their own catchment areas. If Preston Manor were to have its own catchment then those of neighbouring primary schools would have to be redrawn. However if the new primary school has Foundation status then community school catchments would not apply and the school may devise its own admisisons criteria.

In fact we were told that Preston Manor was conducting the consultation because it was a Foundation School and therefore managed its own affairs, although it was made clear that Brent Council strongly backed the proposal. Confusion was increased when Watts seemed to be addressing educational rather than building issues and speaking for the council.

Only three questions were allowed by the chair of the meeting because of the crowded agenda so 'consultation' was more about residents being 'told' rather than asked. However residents did manage to speak about their concerns about increased  traffic and in a soapbox earlier, Rose Ashton, head of nearby Chalkhill Primary School, was able to express her concerns about the impact of the expansion on her own school which has vacancies in both its nursery and reception places. This phase of the consultation ends on Monday so there is still time to get a response in. Consultation document HERE

If Preston Manor governors decide to go ahead there will be a further six week statutory consultation ending in December.