“Following the report provided by Carmarthenshire County Council regarding the responses from the consultation process we have been approached by several parents stating that their proforma’s were not included in the document, even though they had been submitted and receipts received. From the responses received it would appear that there is strong support for keeping the dual stream with a total of 154 recognised responses as well as a signed petition of 505 signatories (which has already been submitted). The against group have been open in sharing their names and relationship to the school whilst the for campaigners have continued with the clandestine approach of not wishing to be named with over 30 anonymous entries. Many of the pro change consultees were past teachers, councillors, head teachers and current staff. It was suggested that the responses were relatively equal with for and against. The total number of those against compared to those for is a ratio of 5:1. How is this considered to be equal when the consultees for supporting the change do not appear to include many parental opinions and a vast number of those against the change do not appear to have been included?”
Minutes:
“Following the report provided by Carmarthenshire County Council regarding the responses from the consultation process we have been approached by several parents stating that their proforma’s were not included in the document, even though they had been submitted and receipts received. From the responses received it would appear that there is strong support for keeping the dual stream with a total of 154 recognised responses as well as a signed petition of 505 signatories (which has already been submitted). The against group have been open in sharing their names and relationship to the school whilst the for campaigners have continued with the clandestine approach of not wishing to be named with over 30 anonymous entries. Many of the pro change consultees were past teachers, councillors, head teachers and current staff. It was suggested that the responses were relatively equal with for and against. The total number of those against compared to those for is a ratio of 5:1. How is this considered to be equal when the consultees for supporting the change do not appear to include many parental opinions and a vast number of those against the change do not appear to have been included?”
Response by Councillor G.O. Jones, Executive Board Member for Education & Children:-
“The Consultation Report included within the papers before the Executive Board includes all submissions received by the Education and Children’s Services Department by the extended date for the closure of the consultation period on the 18th March 2016. The Department has checked all the submissions received and is able to confirm this position, whilst noting that three respondents expressed their desire that their comments are not made public. Accordingly these three responses have been discounted for the purposes of the Consultation Report.
The original closure date for the submission of responses, set in accordance with the School Organisation Code, was the 11th March 2016 but at the request of some people the Director of Education and Children’s Services agreed to extend the consultation period by one week to the 18th March to allow all interested parties ample time to submit their views. A considerable exchange of correspondence has continued with various interested parties after the closure of the consultation period but in order to ensure compliance with the School Organisation Code and to ensure that all parties are treated equitably and consistently only submissions received by the 18th March have been included in the Consultation Report.
The decision on whether or not to proceed with the proposal must, by virtue of the law, be made on the grounds of the best interests of learners. It is, therefore, the educational merits that must be the determining factor in decision making, rather than the number of responses received either in favour of or against the proposal. All persons or organisations have a right to express their views, irrespective of their individual status. Should any person or organisation consider that they have made a submission by the 18th March 2016 and it has not been included in the Consultation Report they are invited to formally write to the Department setting out the details and providing evidence of their submission.
Should the proposal proceed to the next stage of the statutory process all interested parties will have a further opportunity to make representations to the County Council following the publication of a statutory notice before a final decision is made.”
Mrs Lomas asked the following supplementary question:-
“In a just and fair society trust is fostered by transparency and openness. How can this process be deemed transparent and open when so much evidence points to the manipulation of statistics and the misleading of parents by those entrusted with the care of their children.”
Response by Councillor G.O. Jones, Executive Board Member for Education & Children
“I understand your comments but everything is as open and transparent as it possibly can be.”