Agenda item - Public Involvement

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

 

(a)       Petitions: to receive any petitions presented to the full council or at the meeting itself;

           

(i)            Proposed Re-organisation of the EPS/ Learning Support Services

 

 

(b)       Written Questions: to receive any questions submitted by the due date of 12 noon on the 4 January 2016;

 

 

(c)        Deputations: to receive any deputations submitted by the due date of 12 noon on the 4 January 2016.

 

(i)            Playbus Service

 

52(a)   Petitions

 

(i)        Proposed Re-organisation of the EPS/Learning Support Services – Ms S Gillett

 

52.1      The Committee considered the petition which had been presented to Full Council on 17 December 2015

 

52.2      The Chair provided the following response:

 

Thank you for your Petition which has been referred from Full Council.

 

On behalf of the Administration, I would like to make an important statement having had chance to reflect since Full Council on the issues raised by parents, including staff delivering the service; and other stakeholders during this nearly year-long review process.

 

The number of signatories to the Petition was over 10,000. It demonstrates a huge degree of interest and concern out there in our community about these proposals. When we came to office last May, we stated clearly that we would be a listening council. And listening, as well as hearing, is what we have been doing in the context of these reforms.

 

As I’ve said on several occasions, the purpose of these proposals has only ever been to deliver better outcomes for parents with children with special educational needs and disability.  Senior professionals managing the service care passionately about these children, as I know do front-line staff.

 

They have learned from other parts of the country and the plans being put forward, we believe, set out some really innovative proposals to integrate and modernise the current learning support service to children with SENDs. 

 

However, it is clear that there are very strong passions in this debate and various accusations and counter-accusations, many of them misinformed, about whether or not these proposals will deliver the better outcomes we all want to see. As a consequence, it has become increasingly difficult to have an informed and rational debate about the efficacy of these reforms; what sits behind them; and crucially how to ensure we take parents, staff and stakeholders with us on this important journey to provide the world-class provision for SENDs that I have described.

 

These reforms are far too important to get wrong. Similarly, given that austerity cuts are not the underlying factor for these changes, it is much better that we take a comprehensive stock-take now, before implementing major changes to the learning support service in future.

For that reason, the Administration has agreed that when the current staff consultation regarding the reorganisation of the learning support service concludes at the end of January, we will in addition, commission an independent review and assessment of the council’s plans – undertaken by an independent expert in the area of SENDs from outside the local authority.

 

The person appointed will be asked to prepare a report for this committee on the efficacy of the council’s planned reorganisation of the Learning Support Service, taking into account best practice from other local authorities. It will not be their job to adjudicate or to decide whether these reforms should go ahead, but rather to provide the city with a very clear assessment of how these proposals will deliver better outcomes for children with special educational needs and disability in future.

 

They will be required to meet with parent groups, affected children, staff and stakeholders to consider the proposals then being put forward by the council. I will consult with opposition party spokespeople in terms of drawing up the terms of reference for the independent assessor, as well as involve them in the appointment of the independent assessor in due course.

 

When the report comes back to a future meeting of this committee, Members will have the opportunity to discuss and note the report; both in terms of the council’s final decisions in regard to the operational review of Learning Support Services, as well as the independent assessor’s view of them. Both reports will be published.

 

I will be making no further comments about the current proposals for the reorganisation of the Learning Support Service until the staff consultation has concluded on 31^st January and the independent review is has also completed.

 

I hope members of the public that have come along today to ask me questions about this service will keep this in mind. It is of course, in light of this statement, up to them whether they still want to continue to ask questions.

 

In the meantime, this specific aspect of our reform of SENDs continues to be closely examined, but the other elements of the review of SENDs of course will continue as planned. Indeed, there is a committee paper for discussion about this later on today.

 

52.3      RESOLVED- That the petition be noted.

 

 

 

 

 

52(b)   Written Questions

 

(i)        Learning Support Services – Mr O Sharpe

 

52.4      Mr Sharpe presented the following question:

 

The pre-school element of the Learning Support Service (PRESENS) provides vital, early support to children and parents, often during the stage when a child’s SEN issues are first being suspected.

 

At the full council meeting on 17th December the lead Councillor for CYPS, Councillor Bewick, stated that there are no plans to reduce front line support for children with SEN (see at 30mins 10sec into webcast). In this context, what are the current staffing levels in PRESENS and what are the proposed levels of staff committed to delivering support to pre-school children in the latest version of the LSS redesign?

 

52.5      The Chair provided the following response:

 

I refer to my earlier statement in response to the petition

 

52.6      Mr Sharpe asked the following supplementary question:

 

Would parents be advised of the options being considered during the consultation process?

 

52.7      The Chair provided the following response:

 

The consultation between the Council and staff was underway, and when that was completed an independent expert would be invited to look at the recommendations. They would then meet with parent groups, affected children, staff and stakeholders to consider the proposals then being put forward by the council. At this time no decision had been made on specific details.

 

(ii)          Learning Support Services – Mr S Elliott

 

52.8      Mr Elliott presented the following question:

     

Proposed figures for the learning support service show a decrease from 21fte teachers to 14. This is a real-terms decrease in front line staff capacity, "disguised" by an increase in assistant posts and the addition of staff to the Learning Support Service from teams that are already in existence.  Can the council explain how they will ensure that this decrease doesn’t affect the quality of support the new service can provide, particularly in relation to children in the early years, who will be disadvantaged by having no dedicated team of specialist pre-school teachers to support them at this critical age?

 

52.9    The Chair provided the following response:

 

I refer to my earlier statement in response to the petition

 

52.10  Mr Elliott asked the following supplementary question:

 

                Given that there will be fewer specialist advisers who will have a wider remit to work with schools and families, this new team will not be able to offer the full range of support, across all age ranges, to schools and pre-schools currently available. Can the committee outline which parts of service currently offered to schools, will not be provided by the new specialist advisers?

 

52.11  The operational detail was subject to consultation, and an independent expert would look at the plans.

 

(iii)         Learning Support Service – Alison Muir

52.12  Ms Muir asked the following question:

 

The redesign proposes that the Literacy Support Service (LSS) continue to operate as a traded service.  The service is currently funded 40% by DSG and 60% by schools’ buy back.  Cutting DSG funding would require an increase in schools prices by up to 66% for each unit of time, rendering the service unsustainable, and leading to the loss of support for up to 400 pupils and loss of jobs for up to 8 f.t.e teachers.  Can the councillors guarantee current levels of DSG funding for the LSS, or ensure that any cut is explicitly included in consideration of the impact?

 

52.13  The Chair provided the following response:

           

            I refer to my earlier statement in response to the petition

 

           

(iv)      Learning Support Service – Sadie Gillett

 

52.14  Ms Gillett asked the following question:

 

Downsview school and Hillside school provide outreach support for school-age children with complex needs attending mainstream schools; PRESENS currently make sure that the needs of these children are met within their mainstream pre-school settings , i.e. children with severe learning difficulties, moderate learning difficulties or profound and multiple learning difficulties. Please could the council explain which team within the proposed Learning Support Service would be responsible for meeting the needs of these children in the pre-school phase, given that there appears to be no identified team covering these needs in pre-school within the proposed re-design

 

52.15  The Chair provided the following response:

           

            I refer to my earlier statement in response to the petition.

 

52.16  Ms Gillett asked the following supplementary question:

 

If the review finds changes need to be made, will there be an opportunity to redesign the redesign.

 

52.17  Decisions would be made in due course, and those decisions would be shared with all relevant parties.

 

52(c)    Deputations

 

(i)        Playbus Service - Natalie Stow and Aleya Khatun

 

52.18   The Deputation was introduced by Natalie Stow and Aleya Khatun. The Deputation stated:

 

I and other parents whose children use Playbus are deeply concerned that the Council is considering cutting this well-used and loved service, so much so that we have united as a group to make a formal response. 

 

There are many reasons we all love the Playbus. My son is two and we go to Playbus every week.  It is literally the highlight of our week - a sentiment echoed by many other families. I cannot tell my son it is Playbus day until just before we set off, otherwise all I get is ‘Playbus! Playbus!’ until it is time to go. Another mum describes how her four-year-old exclaims ‘Yes!’ on Playbus day.  Yet another explains how it is the only opportunity her little girl has to see her old friends who went to a different school from her.  Many speak of how it reduces isolation and promotes a sense of inclusion and belonging in the community.

 

Playbus is full of varied and novel play ideas which inspire and challenge children and encourage them to learn and explore.  Upside down plastic crates become cookers, wood shavings are casseroles, wooden boxes are dens, climbing frames and stages – all within the space of 10 minutes. 

 

At Playbus, children can decide for themselves what activities they want to engage in, with adults on hand for guidance only if needed; it thus encourages children to use their own imaginations and to organise themselves in their play with other children, which they show quite remarkable ability to do.  This helps build their social skills, confidence, self-esteem and independence.

 

There are both outdoor and indoor activities and Playbus is there come rain or shine.  Playbus makes excellent use of the city’s outdoor spaces and encourages children – many of whom may not have access to a garden - to play outside and be active, promoting both physical and mental health and helping redce health inequalities .

 

Playbus currently operates in targeted socio-economically deprived areas of the city – those which most need the service.  Its welcoming atmosphere and positive learning opportunities for children bring people together, children and parents alike, thus reducing social isolation and fostering a strong sense of community.  It is free, making it accessible to all and worthwhile popping along even if you only have half an hour.  Playbus is multi-cultural, embracing diversity and promoting social cohesion.

 

Playbus travels to us rather than us having to make a big trek out, which is especially good for those who do not drive or have access to a car.  On top of this it takes place after school hours, a time of day when even for those with children not yet of school age, there does not tend to be much going on and there is time and energy to be spent before dinner.

 

Unlike the vast majority of other activities for children, Playbus is open to children of all ages.  It is important and beneficial for children to be able to socialise within mixed-age groups.  I once sat watching my toddler play ‘Connect 4’ quite happily for over half an hour with a seven year old he had just met at Playbus.  It took a few minutes for them to get the measure of each other, and it was fascinating to observe the older boy get onto my son’s level and work out what he could and couldn’t understand about the game.  You could call it helping to develop empathy and understanding of others.  It was heart-warming to watch – and this is not an isolated incident; anyone observing the children at Playbus will see this sort of thing time and again.

 

Playbus is completely unique as a service.  Music classes, swimming classes, language classes, playgroups….you name it, all of these exist in the city in abundance – which is great, and means if one closes down or does not work out for you, you can go elsewhere.  But there is nothing else like Playbus.

 

We should also like to draw your attention to the 2015 report of the All Party Parliamentary Group on a Fit and Healthy Childhood, entitled ‘Play’.  This document highlights the vital importance of non-directed, child-led play for all areas of child development, helping children to acquire skills that will serve them for life.  It also acknowledges the role of play in helping to combat the current epidemic of childhood obesity. The report notes that the right to play is enshrined in the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child and is clear that play should be regarded as a fundamental service rather than an add-on.  Crucially, it is explicit in its recommendation that local authorities should ring-fence funding for play. 

 

For all these reasons, we request that the Council ensures the ongoing provision of the Playbus service as we know it.  If Playbus goes, children and local communities are really going to lose out.

 

 

 

 

52.19  The Chair provided the following response:

 

Thank you for your deputation. The proposal to cease to deliver a play service forms part of the wider budget proposals for the council and will be considered at full council in February. I fully acknowledge that the Play Service is very much valued by families across the city. Unfortunately with the significant budget pressures that the council is facing we have had to make some very tough choices about where we can reduce expenditure. There is no statutory requirement to provide a play service and most councils do not run such a service. For the past year the main funding has come from the Housing HRA budget which is under enormous pressure next year and from Public Health which has received a cut to its grant.Because I recognise that this is a service that is very much valued across the city, I together with Members of the Administration, supported by officers have been developing proposals for the service to receive external sponsorship. We will be meeting with potential sponsors in the next few weeks and I will be able to provide an update to the committee on the outcomes of these discussions at our next meeting in March. If the city as a whole believes that the play service should be saved then I very much hope that the city will offer financial support to maintain the service.

 

52.20  RESOLVED- That the Deputation be noted.