Agenda and minutes

Apologies for absence were received from Councillors D.J.R. Bartlett and J. Williams as well as Canon B. Witt. 

There were no declarations of party whips.

The following questions were received and presented at the meeting.

4.1       Question by Darren Seward, Dual Stream Committee

Carmarthenshire County Council has produced a document describing its proposal to CLOSE/DISCONTINUE Llangennech Infants and Llangennech Juniors school and open a new Welsh Medium only Llangennech community primary school. why is ccc pushing the Welsh assembly directives on Welsh language so far when it is not happening in other counties like Swansea neath port talbot and Newport??

4.2       Question by Nikki Lloyd, Dual Stream Committee

There are 121 pupils currently in the School who are not living in the village of Llangennech. However, there are 96 children living in the village travelling to other schools, out of area. Only 15 of those children are attending welsh medium so that leaves 81 attending alternative English medium. Why such a differentiation? Some of these could have had places in Llangennech but have been turned away making the English stream look as if it is declining.

4.3       Question by Nikki Lloyd, Dual Stream Committee

We have already had one parent that we know of refused a place in Byn due to 54 requests for only 30 places. Hendy is full also, where are you going to provide provision for parents who want or NEED to educate their children in English medium?

4.4       Question by Robert Willock, Dual Stream Committee

Out of the 121 children currently in the school 91 are attending Welsh medium. Why is this so? when the new furnace school is under capacity by 132 places and Brynserfiel under by 38.5 Pupils according to section 2.3 of the consultation document. There's surplus capacity at Welsh Mediums which is not in alignment with School Organisation Code 2013 which states no more than a 10% surplus. There are 1,710 as per Carmarthenshire Councils website surplus places in all welsh medium primary schools in carmartheshire figures taken from ccc own website. So doesnt justify any further spaces being created.The School Organisation code 2013 states when developing proposals relevant bodies should have regard to Local plans for ecomomic or housing development. Why has there been no regard given to the 91 houses being built in Hendy and 700 plus houses planned for Pontardulais? Surely, this would have a major impact on the surrounding schools. Hendy is one of the nearest schools for English medium if this proposal goes through. However, Llanedi school is facing closure and advised to relocate to hendy. Hendy school are already nearing full capacity and as a dual stream are earmarked for changing to Welsh Medium Only. The other nearest English medium is the Bryn School but the county have already been issuing reject letters as they have received 54 applications so far and only have 30 spaces. As well as the proposed new school being unfit for purpose as it does not serve the community it’s meant to support, English speaking children appear to have no nearby alternatives?

4.5       Question by Jacqueline Seward, Dual Stream Committee

Following the closure  ...  view the full minutes text for item 4.

Carmarthenshire County Council has produced a document describing its proposal to CLOSE/DISCONTINUE Llangennech Infants and Llangennech Juniors school and open a new Welsh Medium only Llangennech community primary school. why is ccc pushing the Welsh assembly directives on Welsh language so far when it is not happening in other counties like Swansea neath port talbot and Newport??

There are 121 pupils currently in the School who are not living in the village of Llangennech. However, there are 96 children living in the village travelling to other schools, out of area. Only 15 of those children are attending welsh medium so that leaves 81 attending alternative English medium. Why such a differentiation? Some of these could have had places in Llangennech but have been turned away making the English stream look as if it is declining.

We have already had one parent that we know of refused a place in Byn due to 54 requests for only 30 places. Hendy is full also, where are you going to provide provision for parents who want or NEED to educate their children in English medium?

Out of the 121 children currently in the school 91 are attending Welsh medium. Why is this so? when the new furnace school is under capacity by 132 places and Brynserfiel under by 38.5 Pupils according to section 2.3 of the consultation document. There's surplus capacity at Welsh Mediums which is not in alignment with School Organisation Code 2013 which states no more than a 10% surplus. There are 1,710 as per Carmarthenshire Councils website surplus places in all welsh medium primary schools in carmartheshire figures taken from ccc own website. So doesnt justify any further spaces being created.The School Organisation code 2013 states when developing proposals relevant bodies should have regard to Local plans for ecomomic or housing development. Why has there been no regard given to the 91 houses being built in Hendy and 700 plus houses planned for Pontardulais? Surely, this would have a major impact on the surrounding schools. Hendy is one of the nearest schools for English medium if this proposal goes through. However, Llanedi school is facing closure and advised to relocate to hendy. Hendy school are already nearing full capacity and as a dual stream are earmarked for changing to Welsh Medium Only. The other nearest English medium is the Bryn School but the county have already been issuing reject letters as they have received 54 applications so far and only have 30 spaces. As well as the proposed new school being unfit for purpose as it does not serve the community it’s meant to support, English speaking children appear to have no nearby alternatives?

Following the closure of a school and the consequential loss of a language stream, provision should be offered to at least equivalent standards to learners according to the School Organisation code 2013. However, Llangennech is currently Green. Hendy is yellow and the Bryn is Amber. How is this equivalent?

Is there need for additional nursery places in the area when we already have two providers? Specific factors need to be taken into account for proposals to add or remove nursery classes as outline in the School Organisation Code 2013. Relevant bodies should take into account specific factors: the standard of nursery education and the sufficiency of accommodation and facilities offered both in the classroom and outdoors, and the viability of any school that wishes to add nursery places; whether there is a need for additional nursery places in the area; the levels of demand for certain types of nursery education e.g. Welsh medium or provision with a religious character; the effect of the proposals on other institutions, including private and third sector providers; and the extent to which proposals will integrate early years education with childcare services or are consistent with an integrated approach. Within the consultation document, there is no evidence that these have been taken into consideration and the effect of the proposals on other private sector providers?

Is there need for additional nursery places in the area when we already have two providers? Specific factors need to be taken into account for proposals to add or remove nursery classes as outline in the School Organisation Code 2013. Relevant bodies should take into account specific factors: the standard of nursery education and the sufficiency of accommodation and facilities offered both in the classroom and outdoors, and the viability of any school that wishes to add nursery places; whether there is a need for additional nursery places in the area; the levels of demand for certain types of nursery education e.g. Welsh medium or provision with a religious character; the effect of the proposals on other institutions, including private and third sector providers; and the extent to which proposals will integrate early years education with childcare services or are consistent with an integrated approach. Within the consultation document, there is no evidence that these have been taken into consideration and the effect of the proposals on other private sector providers?

The consultation document is a flawed document that does not recognise those disadvantaged by the proposals from within Llangennech village.  To state that there is nobody affected by these proposed changes is naïve and ignorant and shows that the Authority has failed to show ‘due regard’ under the Public Duty Act to those affected by simply saying they don’t exist.  In doing so, they have not covered the Health and Safety aspects or capacity issues at alternative schools. If walking to Hendy for example, crossing a dual carriageway, will put lives at risk.  There is a CrashMap available online which shows along that particular route, one accident occurring every 2 months on average.  Therefore, this consultation simply exposes a rush to a predetermined outcome irrespective of any views that were to be gathered throughout the process. We believe that we can evidence the fact that either the LEA or the governing body or both have failed to comply with The School Organisational Code 2013 and possibly the law. Do you think this is acceptable to put young children at risk daily?

The consultation document is a flawed document that does not recognise those disadvantaged by the proposals from within Llangennech village.  To state that there is nobody affected by these proposed changes is naïve and ignorant and shows that the Authority has failed to show ‘due regard’ under the Public Duty Act to those affected by simply saying they don’t exist.  In doing so, they have not covered the Health and Safety aspects or capacity issues at alternative schools. If walking to Hendy for example, crossing a dual carriageway, will put lives at risk.  There is a CrashMap available online which shows along that particular route, one accident occurring every 2 months on average. Therefore, this consultation simply exposes a rush to a predetermined outcome irrespective of any views that were to be gathered throughout the process. We believe that we can evidence the fact that either the LEA or the governing body or both have failed to comply with The School Organisational Code 2013 and possibly the law. Do you think this is acceptable to put young children at risk daily?

Figures manipulated – From the information supplied by the LEA as the groups knowledge of the school it is clearly evident that the figures have been manipulated by individuals to bolster a particular scenario. We can evidence that the current English streams at the school make up over 30% of the total number of pupils. The consultation states llangennech infant school total pupils in 2015 had 186 in Welsh stream. This is not a true figure as it includes all pupils in Derbyn 1 and 2 which totals 94 pupils, irrelevant of it they are registtered to continue into the English stream they have been falsely identified for the purpose of the consultation document as Welsh stream pupils. Also if we factor in the 27% coming from outside areas, together with a potential loss of English Stream, current projections will show that Llangennech School will have over 50% of pupils coming from outside the area. Do you believe, that we then have ‘the right school, in the right place and can you confirm if these figures are correct ?

Figures manipulated – From the information supplied by the LEA as the groups knowledge of the school it is clearly evident that the figures have been manipulated by individuals to bolster a particular scenario. We can evidence that the current English streams at the school make up over 30% of the total number of pupils. The consultation states llangennech infant school total pupils in 2015 had 186 in Welsh stream. This is not a true figure as it includes all pupils in Derbyn 1 and 2 which totals 94 pupils, irrelevant of it they are registtered to continue into the English stream they have been falsely identified for the purpose of the consultation document as Welsh stream pupils. Also if we factor in the 27% coming from outside areas, together with a potential loss of English Stream, current projections will show that Llangennech School will have over 50% of pupils coming from outside the area. Do you believe, that we then have ‘the right school, in the right place and can you confirm if these figures are correct ?

Special Educational Needs: No consideration has been given for children with special educational needs who are usually advised to only go in an English medium. Stream or the language of their home environment.Children with global delay struggle with one language let alone two, therefore by removing the dual stream it would exclude these children from attending the school.Children with an Autistic Spectrum Disorder really cant cope with change in routine, so if they were to start then struggle in a Welsh Medium school and then have to move to an English Medium school that change would have a massive impact on them. How has this been overlooked and why has it not been addressed?

Special Educational Needs: No consideration has been given for children with special educational needs who are usually advised to only go in an English medium. Stream or the language of their home environment.Children with global delay struggle with one language let alone two, therefore by removing the dual stream it would exclude these children from attending the school.Children with an Autistic Spectrum Disorder really cant cope with change in routine, so if they were to start then struggle in a Welsh Medium school and then have to move to an English Medium school that change would have a massive impact on them. How has this been overlooked and why has it not been addressed?

There are approximately 11 dual Stream Schools in Carmarthenshire which according to the Welsh Language Strategy, are being earmarked for Welsh Medium only. It must be recognised that not all these schools will be suitable based upon their logistics as they will be dual stream for a reason, so how and who is assessing the demand and suitability? Has an horizon scanning exercise been conducted for Llangennech community i.e to assess how the village/population of Llangennech will look in 5, 10, 15 years time?  With an increased number of new builds, an influx in migration, being close to the M4 corridor, can we confidently say that Welsh Medium Only will meet these demands when 80% of the population is already English speaking. After all, 27% of pupils are coming from outside areas and village figures do not show an increase in demand for Welsh.The Welsh Language Strategy Impact has also not been assessed properly if at all.  There is no reference to English speakers having less of an appreciation of the cultural heritage of Wales if they attend English Medium only, more people are likely to try the Welsh stream if they know they can fallback to English within the same school.  This will have the adverse effect. The use of Welsh within the community is minimal and does not support the linguistic demographics or the stats from the 2011 consensus. Why aren’t these risks being factored in?

There are approximately 11 dual Stream Schools in Carmarthenshire which according to the Welsh Language Strategy, are being earmarked for Welsh Medium only. It must be recognised that not all these schools will be suitable based upon their logistics as they will be dual stream for a reason, so how and who is assessing the demand and suitability? Has an horizon scanning exercise been conducted for Llangennech community i.e to assess how the village/population of Llangennech will look in 5, 10, 15 years time?  With an increased number of new builds, an influx in migration, being close to the M4 corridor, can we confidently say that Welsh Medium Only will meet these demands when 80% of the population is already English speaking. After all, 27% of pupils are coming from outside areas and village figures do not show an increase in demand for Welsh.The Welsh Language Strategy Impact has also not been assessed properly if at all.  There is no reference to English speakers having less of an appreciation of the cultural heritage of Wales if they attend English Medium only, more people are likely to try the Welsh stream if they know they can fallback to English within the same school.  This will have the adverse effect. The use of Welsh within the community is minimal and does not support the linguistic demographics or the stats from the 2011 consensus. Why aren’t these risks being factored in?

The Community Impact Assessment is not actually an Impact Assessment at all. It has not recognised any risks or risk assessed them (given a positive, negative or neutral rating). One would expect consideration to be given to the impact on neighbouring schools, impact on parents and families, impact on pupils, travel implications, impact of community demographics, environmental impacts, impact upon community activities, impact on residents. These are the areas which are likely to be negatively assessed and have totally been overlooked! Why?

The Community Impact Assessment is not actually an Impact Assessment at all. It has not recognised any risks or risk assessed them (given a positive, negative or neutral rating). One would expect consideration to be given to the impact on neighbouring schools, impact on parents and families, impact on pupils, travel implications, impact of community demographics, environmental impacts, impact upon community activities, impact on residents. These are the areas which are likely to be negatively assessed and have totally been overlooked! Why?

The Chair thanked the representatives of the Dual Stream Committee for their questions and contribution at the meeting. He advised those present that as the Committee was not the decision making body in this matter, he would not be answering the questions directly but noted that they would be forwarded, subject to the Committee’s agreement, for the attention of the Executive Board when it considered the consultation report. The Chair asked the Director of Education & Children’s Services to respond to the issues raised as part of the next item, pending a formal response by the Executive Board in due course. 

Mrs. E. Heyes had earlier declared a personal interest in this item and left the meeting during its consideration and determination.

Councillor W.G. Hopkins had earlier declared that he is a governor on the Federated Llangennech School Governing Body and that the Local Authority’s Monitoring Officer had confirmed that he was permitted to take part and vote during consideration and determination of this item. 

The Committee considered a proposal to discontinue Llangennech Infant and Junior Schools and establish Llangennech Community Primary School in their place and the submissions received during the formal consultation period, as set out in the consultation report, which was included within the report under consideration.

The Director of Education & Children’s Services outlined the background to the proposal and the content and layout of the report being presented to the Committee. He noted that since the inception of the Modernising Education Programme, it had been the Authority’s intention to replace Infant and Junior Schools with Community Primary Schools. He reminded the Committee that in September 2014, following an initial ‘soft’ federation, the Governing Bodies of both Llangennech Infants and Llangennech Junior schools resolved to pursue a formal federation from April 2015. The Authority now wished to proceed with a proposal to create a Community Primary school to replace Llangennech Infants and Llangennech Junior schools. As part of the proposal for the new primary school, it was proposed to change the current linguistic categories of the two schools from Dual Stream to Welsh-medium in order to increase the provision of Welsh-medium education in Carmarthenshire, ensure that bilingualism was increased in the Llangennech area and to introduce part-time nursery education into the new school.

The Committee was informed that in accordance with Executive Board’s instructions, a formal consultation exercise commenced on the 25th January 2016. The consultation period was initially intended to extend until the 11th March, as the minimum requirement of the School Organisational Code but the Director advised that at the request of some stakeholders, he had agreed to extend the consultation period by one week so that all interested parties would have ample time to respond. The consultation period subsequently ended on the 18th March 2016. The Director noted that extensive correspondence had continued to be exchanged with persons opposed to the Council’s proposals following the closure of the consultation period. This correspondence was not included in the consultation report as it was not appropriate to do so, with all parties needing to be afforded the same opportunity to express views to the County Council within the formal school organisation process. He reminded the Committee that should the Executive Board resolve to proceed to the next stage of the statutory process, all interested parties would have another opportunity to formally submit their views to the Council before a final decision was made. The Committee was also informed that during the consultation period, the Director, the Chief Education Officer and the Executive Board Member for Education & Children had met with representatives of people from Llangennech opposed  ...  view the full minutes text for item 5.

The Committee considered a summary of the Play Sufficiency Assessment and accompanying Action Plan. Members were reminded that Section 11 of the Children & Families (Wales) Measure 2010 placed a duty on local authorities to assess, secure and publish information on sufficient play opportunities for children in their area. The Committee received a brief overview of the assessment and the consultation undertaken, including:

·         Background and local context

·         Why play is important

·         Consultation undertaken

·         Findings and key themes highlighted by children and young people, parents, schools and town/community councils

·         Assessment Criteria and Priorities

·         Positive advances made since 2013

·         Challenges

·         What can communities do?

The Committee was also informed that a draft copy of the assessment form and action plan was submitted to Welsh Government on the 31st March 2016 and final documents would be submitted upon Executive Board approval.

The following comments were made during consideration of the report and its appendices:

Officers were commended for their work on this issue but concern was expressed that their endeavours might count for nothing as the Welsh Government itself often contradicted its own policies on a local level. Reference was made to a recent planning application in Carmarthen to build housing on a grassed playing area used by local children. The Authority had rejected the application but following an appeal by the applicant, the Welsh Government’s own Planning Inspectorate approved the plan and this playing area had now been lost.

Numerous comments were made in relation to supporting local sports clubs in overcoming increased fees for utilising playing fields and other facilities as well as the costs involved in providing new playground facilities for the county’s children. The Director of Education & Children’s Services acknowledged the Committee’s frustrations with the lack of resources available to support those needs identified by the assessment. He suggested that new schools and their facilities were an ideal place for enabling play and activities outside school hours and that the Authority was open to discussions with communities and school governors about developing such opportunities.

It was asked whether the Authority had contingency plans in place so that it had projects that were ‘ready to go’ should funding suddenly become available. The Childcare & Play Sufficiency Manager informed the Committee that the service did have plans and priority areas identified in the event of any future funding becoming available.        

The Committee UNANIMOUSLY RESOLVED the Plan Sufficiency Assessment and accompanying Action Plan be endorsed for consideration by the Executive Board.

The Committee considered the Biennial Review of the MEP and an updated prioritised programme for school rationalisation and investment. Members were reminded that in 2010, the County Council had resolved that the Programme be reviewed and revised every two years, or otherwise as required, to ensure consistency with the timeframe of the national 21st Century Schools Programme. The report provided the Committee with a further update on the status of the Programme and an opportunity to comment on the forward work programme.

The following comments were made during consideration of the report and its appendices:

Concern was expressed that rural schools were not receiving sufficient investment which in turn made them less attractive to prospective pupils’ parents. The Director of Education & Children’s Services acknowledged the concern but stated that the Programme was based on school viability / sustainability in addition to the competing financial demands on the Authority’s services. In developing the Programme, it had been decided to be open and up-front about the viability of schools but in doing so, the Authority had been criticised and accused of trying to close schools by suggesting that they were under threat. The Director added that ultimately, the Authority was unable to invest everywhere at the same time and that the criteria, as detailed in the report, was used to prioritise investment and the allocation of funds towards a particular school. It was not an easy task but officers were seeking to be open about the Authority’s priorities.

The decision to utilise the former Pantycelyn site in Llandovery was welcomed but the future of other similar sites across the county was queried. The School Modernisation Manager stated that for the former Gwendraeth School site, the aim was to make the site safe for those services that continued to operate from that location and especially as Neuadd y Gwendraeth continued to be used on a regular basis. He reminded the Committee that there was a corporate working group continuing to look at options for former school sites and the Education & Children Department had aspirations for keeping the Gwendraeth site as an educational establishment in the future. The Director of Education & Children’s Services added that the former Tregib School site was an option for the future provision of primary education in Llandeilo but much work was still needed on proposals for these sites.   

The Committee UNANIMOUSLY RESOLVED that the updated Modernising Education Programme and capital programme be endorsed for consideration by the Executive Board.

The Committee considered its Forward Work Programme (FWP) for 2016/17 which had been developed following the Committee’s informal planning session held in April 2016. The following comments were made during consideration of the report:

The Chief Education Officer noted that an additional report would be presented to the Committee at its next meeting in June in relation to a recent consultation on the Council’s Welsh in Education Strategic Plan (WESP).

The Committee UNANIMOUSLY RESOLVED that the Forward Work Programme for 2016/17 be endorsed.