Agenda item - Public Involvement

To consider the following matters raised by members of the public:

(a)           Petitions: 

To receive any petitions presented by members of the public.

(b)           Written Questions:

To receive any questions submitted by the due date of 12 noon on the 13 March 2026.

(c)           Deputations:           

To receive any deputations submitted by the due date of 10am on the 9 March 2026.

(a)          Petitions

1)            Bampfield Street & Hurst Crescent Controlled Parking Zone

140.1   Cabinet considered a petition signed by 7 people requesting the introduction of a controlled parking zone (CPZ), also known as residents’ parking scheme, on Bampfield Street and Hurst Crescent in South Portslade.

140.2   Councillor Muten provided the following response:

Thank you for your petition regarding the introduction of controlled parking in Hurst Crescent and Bampfield Street in South Portslade. I am sorry to hear about the parking difficulties currently being experienced by residents. 

The area was previously consulted on in 2020. Since the introduction of the existing scheme, the council has received requests from residents in surrounding roads for further consideration of parking controls. We are a listening council and as a result, South Portslade has been included on the Parking Scheme Priority Timetable. 

At present, officers are focusing on schemes in other parts of the city. However, we are reviewing where Controlled Parking Zones are most needed and how to deliver an accelerated programme to better support residents.

140.3   Resolved- That Cabinet note the petition.

(b)         Public Questions

1)           Middle Street Statutory Notices

140.4   Vanessa McGeachin read the following question:

Could you clarify what proportion of the current budget deficit, which has been cited as a key factor in the decision to close Middle Street Primary School, is attributable to ongoing or one-off payments to staff no longer employed at Middle Street, including the Headteacher?

140.5   Councillor Taylor provided the following reply:

I realise this is a difficult day for parents, Carers, pupils, staff, and the wider community around Middle Street, and echo the comments from Councillor Sankey, which is that we take both the lead up to this issue and the decision we face today extremely seriously.

As I'm sure you'll appreciate, it's not possible for the council to discuss specific circumstances in relating to staffing decisions or associated costs. It's important to note that a school's overall budget position is largely dependent on the decisions taken by the governing body and the school leadership. There's a pressure on school funding nationally, which is noted. However, within that, it's also worth noting that there are lots of schools within the city that are managing their budgets within those parameters, despite specific and one-off costs that may relate to a number of different things, potentially including staffing. Middle Street had a budget deficit first licence from the 2020-21 financial year but that position has deteriorated more recently, which is implicit in your question. The council introduced an interim executive board, partly in response to concerns around governance, the governing body and the management of the budget. I understand the thrust of your question, but the reality is that many schools and many public sector bodies face one-off costs and that is part of the overall management of their budgets. Thank you for your question.

2)           Middle Street Statutory Notices

140.6   Jane Goldsmith read the following question:

Given its heritage as Brighton's oldest school and its central location, close to public transport links - also bearing in mind the recent refurbishment at significant public expense - what are the council’s views on repurposing Middle Street, perhaps as a special needs hub serving the entire city community.

140.7   Councillor Taylor provided the following reply:

Thank you, Jane, for your question, obviously, and also for your comments about the history of the site. I'm so particularly aware of the history of the site. My wife attended the school, and I know of a number of people who have attended the school over many, many years. It's, as I say, a sad thing to consider.

In terms of the building itself, I just want to be clear about how we think about it and the process. So today at Cabinet, we will obviously decide whether to publish statutory notices. There will then be a further decision following those statutory notices. It will only be at that point, and if those things are reached, that the council would then formally consider any usage of the site. I think some of the points you raise are really important. Sadly, in the city, we do have some experience with schools that have shut and we've also seen that sometimes those schools can be broken into. People think it's very clever to break into them and film videos, which it's not, but we have to learn the lessons from that and make sure that if we do proceed in this way, we think about the site very carefully, but I just want to be sort of genuine.

There are no plans whatsoever for the site as yet. In terms of any special needs facility, that will be driven by the need as determined by the department, and there is a whole plan on special needs education in the city, much of which is focused on sites within mainstream school, but if the department were to say that this is a site that is needed, then of course that would be considered. Thank you for your question.

3)           Middle Street Statutory Notices

140.8   Oli Sharpe read the following question:

It concerns me greatly that the report for item 156 fails to capture the temporary nature of the recent problems at Middle Street School, blaming “governance and finance” rather than the widely known break down in relations between the previous senior leadership team and the school community. The phrase “senior leadership” does not appear once. Nor does the report mention that pupil numbers had been consistently around 190 (90% of PAN) for years, making the school financially viable compared to neighbouring schools. It is only the recent complex HR issues and loss of community trust that led to pupil numbers dropping to 141 and then 71 after rumours of closure circulated. With a PAN of 15, a new senior leadership team, and a 10 year plan to pay off the deficit this much loved school would be viable. Why are these details and options not in the report to council?

140.9   Councillor Taylor provided the following reply:

I'm sorry you feel that don't you feel that the report doesn't reflect the reality of the circumstances. What I would say is the report does try to reflect the feedback that came through in the consultation, and what you've brought today is now firmly on the public record and as will be reported, I think we should be clear, and there's no attempt for the council to hide this, that the change in position was relatively rapid versus other things that have happened at other schools in the city where pupil numbers have been very low for a long time. This is a different situation, and I think it's very important that you raise that in the public sphere and for us to consider.

Unfortunately, where we stand is that doesn't change the fundamentals of where we are now and the future decision making, and it's perhaps not a simple just to decide whether we want to keep it open or not. It has to be balanced against all of the factors that are set out in the report and indeed the reasons behind the recommendations that the interim executive board eventually made and then we went to consultation and then we're now considering today. In terms of the substance of your question and your suggestion, it would be very, very unusual for a council to licence a school deficit of 10 years in length, that will be way beyond the normal period. And whilst that might represent a theoretical option, we feel that the realities of the situation make that almost impossible, not least, unfortunately, because of the wider context of falling pupil numbers overall.

What I do want to say is, obviously the report recommends publishing statutory notices and that's what Cabinet will be discussing later today and deciding on. But what I do want to say is, given the lead up and the issues and the concerns that have been raised by parents, I have requested and it has been agreed that we do need to have an independent lessons learned of the process to answer some of the questions that have been risen about process and governance. I think it's really important that the council as a local education authority does learn those lessons and so that will be happening. Thank you for your question.

(c)         Deputations

1)           The Potential of Middle Street Primary School

2)           Deputation to Support Middle Street Primary School

3)           Deputation to Cabinet – Middle Street Primary School

140.10  Cabinet considered three deputations that outlined concerns relating to the potential closure of Middle Street Primary School.

140.11  Councillor Taylor provided a joint response to the three deputations as follows:

Thank you, Chair, and can I say thank you to John, Councillor Shanks on behalf of five residents, and then Ruth for bringing those 3 deputations. I think it's really important that, as a Cabinet and as the public listening to this meeting, hear those inputs and those views from parents. It's an important part of this overall process. I won't cover everything because everything will largely come out in the debate that we have later in terms of how we discuss decision, but there are a few things I just wanted to respond to. So first of all, to John, who talked about the distinct community and consideration of families living in that area and numbers and finances. I just want to take a step back and be really clear that schools are not just numbers in a building. They're not numbers of pupils on a spreadsheet and in a building. A school is something very different and very much more special than just that. And in this city, like many others, there are schools that have a great and rich history. And as we've said, Middle Street is one of those, which makes it a very difficult situation that we're in. As a Cabinet, and when we've had to consider decisions like this before, we don't think about it as numbers on a spreadsheet, not least, as I said in the beginning, that I have so many personal connexions to this school, and by the way, friends who had kids at school have, you know, recently left and in recent memory, family, friends who worked at the school. So, we do have a strong understanding and connection to the school.

So, I just want to try to say, that we're not just thinking about this in terms of numbers. Schools represent something different than that, which is communities of learning, but also broader hubs for the community, which is why it is obviously such a difficult thing to consider. Your point around turnaround is correct. And in this city, we have quite a good record of turning around from special measures to ending up being good or outstanding. So, the city does have a good record of that, including schools in some of our most deprived areas of some kinds been in special measures, but then recovered. I think what we're considering today is obviously slightlyy separate to that because it is also considering that the conclusions of the interim executive board as to whether that is viable to do within the overall context of the pupil numbers and the budget and whether those can be forecast to any degree into the future. And they obviously as I will set out later today, initially considered a path where there would be a turnaround, potentially via Federation, but then they felt that the further shift in numbers meant that that would be impossible. In terms of the, and then sorry, last thing in John, in terms of the overall need for the school, as you say, schools are vital infrastructure. We do have to unfortunately keep coming back to the overall context in this city, which is that we have a very high level of excess capacity, particularly at the primary sector, but also moving into the secondary sector, a very high level of capacity in the system. What do I mean by that? I mean that the number of places available is forecast to be 500 more than the number of pupils that will be coming through. Now, it's always a difficult thing for us to communicate and discuss, and whether we did a good job of it in the previous schools, I'm not sure. But we do have to try and make this fundamental argument that schools, and whether it's this specific school or a different specific school, to school, but schools being well below their capacity is actually not a good or progressive thing for children, families or for staff, because what happens, and we have seen it, is that schools are faced with the invidious decisions of as pupil numbers continue to fall, how do they respond to that? And they often have to respond to that by reducing learning support staff and reducing support for special educational needs. And so unfortunately, you know, my conclusion that I came to is that the most progressive thing, particularly for children with special educational needs and for children from disadvantaged backgrounds, is to try and achieve a system where schools are closer to capacity. They don't have to be full, absolutely not, but it's not a good thing for children who need support to be in schools that are half empty and then declining. And so we have to balance that up and make the decision in the round on that, talking to your point about future need of the school, and we then have to look at the forecast numbers within the overall city centre scope. By the way, I actually essentially agree with what you're saying about thinking about the future of the school. I think sometimes this, the future of the city and its housing, I think sometimes in the past 25 years, the city has roller coasted a bit and responded to changes in demographics, in some cases by expanding schools too quickly.

When we first looked at this issue when you got in, on paper, the conclusion might be that you need to close six or eight schools. We didn't do that. We ended up proposing to close two schools because we were cognizant of the future demographics you can't predict. You should be able to maintain some building capacity because as you say, once schools close, it's very difficult to reopen it.

However, the numbers have sort of persisted, including now two examples where schools themselves, via their governing bodies, have proposed to close. And so unfortunately, even if we were to make this decision, you would still see on paper that we have significant capacity in the system. To Councillor Shanks on behalf of residents, obviously raising issues about the finances, and the governance, I just want to reconfirm that yes, I do think there is merit in an independent lessons learned review. I think in many ways the council did act fairly, not dramatically, but strongly in appointing an interim executive board. That is one of the most extreme steps that we can take as a local authority and I think it was required in this example, given the scale of some of the concerns.

However, that doesn't mean that everything was done perfectly, and that's why I do think we need these independent lessons.

And then, Ruth, on the three points that you've raised, it is very important. Well, one, communication is really important. And, you know, being a parent myself and responding to things from schools, and government bodies, you know, the communication is not always perfect and it is frustrating as a parent not to get things clearly and early.

So in the rest of this process, I can certainly give a commitment that I will be instructing and asking officers to communicate clearly with parents on all of the steps as they flow. In terms of the tracking, that may be a bit more complex and harder to achieve in the way that you've described it, but it is certainly important that we are tracking pupils and tracking the outcomes and understanding how that transition is happening. To your point, there is already a large number of pupils that have moved, as has been discussed.

In terms of the support, the council has proactively reached out to all receiving schools and offered support for that process. Some of it has been more simple and hasn't really required support. There hasn't been support asked for. But as the report sets out, there will of course now be support and transition in the way that we have done for other school closures for all families that are remaining at the school.

And then in terms of the building, yeah, I mean, just to sort of reiterate and to answer your question directly, yes, there will be a fully transparent decision, which is a long way in the future about any use of the building. It won't simply happen and you hear about a planning application if that to be or a new school or anything like that, it will need to be a transparent decision and by the way, we have to go to the Secretary of State anyway for any change of use of the building. So yes, there will be a transparent decision about the future, of which genuinely the answer is there has really been no discussion about what the future of the site is if we were to make those decisions.

I want to reiterate thanks to everybody that has brought the deputations and the broader issues will be brought out in the debate later at Cabinet. Thank you.

140.12  Resolved- That Cabinet note the deputations.