Agenda item

Educational Attainment

 

Councillor Eileen Morley asked the following question of the Leader:

 

Could the leader of the Council explain how, if elected, he intends to deliver on the pledge to ensure that every child in Nottingham is taught in a school judged either good or outstanding by OFSTED, given the atrocious record this authority has had on educational attainment in the past, and the fact that the majority of our schools are now academies which are independently run?

 

Councillor Jon Collins replied as follows:

 

Can I thank Councillor Morley for her question, although I wonder whether at her last meeting here, Councillor Morley is aware of quite how contradictory her question is? She firstly accuses the Council of being responsible for an atrocious record of educational attainment, before implying that there’s nothing the Council could do about school performance because “the majority of our schools are now academies which are independently run”. Fortunately, all of her assumptions are wrong. The Council doesn’t have an atrocious record on educational attainment, the majority of our schools are not yet academies, and despite her government stripping the Council of its powers of funding to support and intervene when schools fail, there are things we can do to help schools improve the standard of education in the city.

 

But first: the Council’s record on driving up school standards. When Nottingham became a unitary authority in 1998, just 26% of our school leavers were getting 5 or more A-C grades at GCSE. On the same measure, last year 77% of school leavers achieved that level. We closed failing schools, and took a pragmatic approach to expanding successful schools and opening new schools, and when inspected by Ofsted were recognised as having made good progress in closing the gap in local and national GCSE performance. Indeed, between 2002 and 2009, that gap closed from 20.2% to just 2.9%, and Nottingham improved from 145^th to 109^th of 152 Local Education Authorities nationally. Indeed, during that period, only Tower Hamlets achieved a faster rate of improvement in GCSE results. Only by 2010 did the rate of improvement start to drop off.

 

Regrettably since that time performance has, at best, stagnated, and comparatively gone backwards. So what’s happened? Well, in the last 5 years the Council has lost its responsibility for school improvement, lost the ability to intervene until after schools have failed, lost the funding necessary to support a team of advisors, and all but 2 of our secondary schools have become academies. We’ve also seen academies increasingly compete with each other for funding, for good pupils, for good staff, and for the best ways to avoid taking difficult children. Secondary schools have largely stopped cooperating with each other; stopped learning from each other, and in some cases developed a greater allegiance to their academy chains than to Nottingham.

 

Of course, all this, and the drop-off of performance, might just be a coincidence. But if that were the case, you’d expect to see a similar drop-off in performance in primary schools, even though the majority are yet to convert to academies. However, the opposite is true. In primary schools, performance continues to improve, and at a faster rate than nationally, so the gap between Nottingham schools and the national average continues to close. Indeed, the performance of our primary schools in 2009 placed us 144^th of 152 Local Education Authorities, last year we were 119^th, moving from 7% to just 3% short of the national average performance. Indeed, the most recent performance data from Ofsted shows the progress made by Nottingham primary pupils in the previous 4 years was ranked in the top 1/3 of all Local Education Authorities nationally.

 

Finally, while in the middle years of the last decade Nottingham and Tower Hamlets GCSE performance improved at the same rate, Tower Hamlets has continued to improve and to close the gap with the national average, while the performance in Nottingham schools has not. Coincidentally, only 1 of Tower Hamlets schools is an academy, with the rest operating as community schools supported by the Local Education Authority, the opposite of the position in Nottingham.

 

Lord Mayor, in a recent Select Committee report, MPs concluded that the move to academies had no positive impact on school performance. I would suggest our experience is that a monopoly of secondary academies would appear to have a negative effect. 

 

So it’s in this context, that to have the Conservatives and the rather-less-than-impressive Nicky Morgan, Secretary of State for Education, tell the Nottingham Post that academisation was the way to tackle poor GCSE performance, bizarrely ignores the evidence and the fact that all but 2 of our secondary schools are already academies.

 

But we are where we are. And we either wash our hands of the problem, because we have no direct responsibility or influence over our secondary schools and in increasing number of primary schools, or we do what we can to help schools turn things around, and that’s what we’ll do.

 

It is realistic to pledge that every child in Nottingham will be taught in a school that is judged good or excellent by OFSTED, and that’s because it’s been done before. Indeed between September 2008 and November 2009 there were no Nottingham schools in an OFSTED category, so effectively, the measure our manifesto has committed to achieving was achieved.

 

But specifically, what now can we do? Well, we’ve already established a School Improvement Board, chaired by the Vice Chancellor of Nottingham University, Sir David Greenaway, to bring together key figures within education in Nottingham to develop a programme of interventions, policy changes, and activities to support schools in our city. The Council’s recent attendance campaign has helped coordinate efforts to highlight the importance of pupils being in lessons, and contributed to improvements during the autumn term and over recent months. We’re establishing a governors’ academy to provide accredited training for all Council nominated governors, and any other school governors interested in developing the skills necessary to hold school management more effectively to account for probity and performance, issues now the Council no longer has a role in.  We are working with secondary schools to develop a new behaviour strategy, and appropriate arrangements for pupils attending alternative education options outside of school. We have plans to help schools recruit to fill vacancies in shortage subjects, by working with the universities to retain graduate teachers, and with schools to promote Nottingham as a city to move to. Individually, the steps schools can take to attract teachers are limited, but as the local authority, we can help with finding accommodation, school places, jobs and jobs with partners by running recruitment fairs in high cost parts of the country. We’re improving the way we deliver services to schools, so they’re easier for head teachers to access and manage. We’re developing a programme of extra-curricular activities to under the title Opportunities Notts, so that all city children can have a range of experiences that evidence suggests builds commitment to schooling and self-confidence in their ability to learn. Perhaps most importantly, we’re looking at ways of funding a network of advisors who will be available to offer support and advice to schools facing challenges.

 

Of course, this government has made school improvement the responsibility of schools themselves. Nevertheless, there clearly remains a demand from head teachers for advice and support from the Council, and a small number of new appointments means we’re increasingly able to offer that.

 

So, to summarise, there’s a lot we can do, there’s a lot we’re already doing, and it’s beginning to make a difference. But in a school system where all but 2 of our secondary schools are now directly funded and directly accountable to the government, surely Councillor Morley should be asking her colleagues in the Department for Education what they intend to do about school performance in the city too? Because isn’t it about time that the government took its responsibility for the performance of academies seriously? And as a cheerleader for government education policy, isn’t it about time that you, Councillor Morley, took some of that responsibility too? And finally, isn’t it time that you explained what you would do differently if your party won the local elections on 7 May? Lord Mayor, I’m happy to take a supplementary on the issue and to ask for a little leniency on your part so that Councillor Morley can spell all of that out. So let me start you off: “is the portfolio holder aware, that if the Conservatives win the local election on 7 May, we will be able to improve school results in Nottingham by…” Over to you Councillor Morley.

 

Redeveloping the Broadmarsh Shopping Centre – View of the Castle

 

Councillor Roger Steel asked the following question of the Portfolio Holder for Planning and Transportation:

 

Does the Portfolio Holder share my views that the draft proposals from Intu for the Broadmarsh Centre are a step in the right direction to enhance the visitor experience to Nottingham? Of particular merit are the reconfigured entrance arrangements and street patterns opposite Carrington Street and Bridlesmith Gate.

 

Intu have stated that these refurbishments would concentrate on food and leisure, so we the council need to compliment this vision. I have mentioned in this chamber before that the jewel that is Nottingham’s Castle Rock needs to be opened up to views from the Lister Gate and Stamford Street corner to combine this leisure and retail offer with a stunning vista. Demolition and relocation of the current Castle College and Boots premises are now distinct possibilities that could achieve this aim. Does she agree with me that we must not miss this opportunity lest it be lost for a generation?

 

Furthermore, does she agree with me that if there are still plans to pedestrianise Collin Street, then the current proposals, which essentially maintain the existing vast brick walled frontage, seem to have no ambition to take advantage of any new pedestrianised area?

 

Councillor Jane Urquhart replied as follows:

 

Thank you Lord Mayor, and thank you Councillor Steel for your question, I’m always glad to hear your views. I may not always agree them, but it’s always interesting to hear your views expressed at some length in this question. What it’s really good to be able to do this afternoon, as a result of this question, is to talk about the huge ambition that we in the Labour group and on the Labour side of the council have for our city, and the ambition that we have shown through the achievements we've already made over the past four years. Because, of course, regenerating the southern end of the city has been a priority for us, and I am sure Councillor Steel would want to congratulate us on having achieved such a great regeneration, refurbishment, and restoration of our station - an award-winning project and catalyst for further development south of the city - an award-winning piece of work, paid for of course by the workplace parking levy, and which secured significant levels of employment and contracts for local firms during its construction. So, yes, I'm delighted that the council has now received the proposals from INTU, the operators of Broadmarsh, for the refurbishment of the centre. They have been subject to informal public consultation prior to their submission as a planning application, and there isn't actually a planning application before us as yet, but that's expected in early April.

 

The proposed scheme is indeed an excellent opportunity to improve the whole of the Broadmarsh area, and I am sure that most residents of Nottingham and the surrounding areas will be really pleased that positive action at last seems to be being taken by INTU, because I’m sure that many of us who have been in this chamber for some time can recall many previous occasions when we thought that a Broadmarsh scheme was just around the corner, and we’ve been sadly disappointed that nothing has come to fruition until now.

 

I am not going to comment on the details of negotiations, nor the proper processes that we have for making planning decisions by having comments in this meeting impacting on that committee’s ability to make a good decision. So I’m not going to comment on the detail of designs that may be proposed at this time. They’re not final yet, the eventual planning application may well look different. So I don’t intend to comment in detail, but what I can say from what I’ve seen so far, is that they do attempt to address some of the key issues that we have wanted to achieve for some time in the city, like the need to create a better link through from Lister gate to Collin Street and Carrington Street, so that sense of coming through from our fantastically restored station through to the city centre is a much more legible and navigable aspect of our city centre, and that one again, we seek to drive regeneration of the southern part of our city.

 

And of course, we come to Collin Street. Plans for Collin Street have been long discussed, in fact it’s been a feature of previous Broadmarsh applications, that we do indeed plan to create an attractive pedestrian space running between Middle Hill and Maid Marian Way, enhancing views, and the route and views to the castle, because of course, yes we do have other ambitious development plans for the castle too, and on the eastern side for a skills hub. So yes, we know that those things are very important, and we are already working hard to enable them to happen.

 

So, views of the castle are important, the opportunity to create a great new pedestrian space and to create a clear route, both north-south and east-west in that area, are a part of our ambitious vision. But actually, isn’t it more important than either of these, that we have the ability to deliver the project? And to be key on ambitious regenerative projects, which are what we have been delivering as a Labour Council? Projects like the station, projects like the tram, bold decisions like the Workplace Parking Levy, things opposed by the Tories, but things are clearly acting as a catalyst for the wider renewal of our city and are driving its economy.

 

I do hope that Councillor Steel has made his views known to INTU through the consultation they’ve been running. He may of course have an opportunity through the statutory consultation, and perhaps through a Planning Committee decision, to take part in the decision making. But of course, he may or may not be a member of the Planning Committee by then, as I suspect the decision will be made after May. And perhaps it’s with that in mind that he sought to so thoroughly make Council aware of his views now.

 

Redeveloping the Broadmarsh Shopping Centre – View of the Caves

 

Councillor Roger Steel asked the following question of the Portfolio Holder for Planning and Transportation:

 

In their proposals for Broadmarsh, Intu recognises the potential of our vast network of caves to be a crucial visitor attraction. With this in mind, does the portfolio holder agree with me that the entrance could be placed to better effect, possibly adjacent the Nottingham Contemporary steps.

 

Similarly, would she agree with me that the ancient remnants of Drury Hill, still exposed in the bowels of the Broadmarsh centre, would be an interesting welcome for inquisitive visitors and local residents in the proposed pocket square on the relocated Drury Walk, and might she suggest a glass viewing panel be incorporated into Intu’s plans?

 

Councillor Jane Urquhart replied as follows:

 

Thank you Lord Mayor, and thanks again Councillor Steel, 2 opportunities, during what could be the last council meeting before the  election, to give me a chance to talk about our pride in our city’s heritage and our group’s ambition for our future, and our delivery of infrastructure projects: thank you very  much Councillor Steel indeed.

 

So, some of the comments in my earlier answer are relevant, so I’m not going to go into a great deal of detail, but of course, yes I am very pleased that Intu have caught up with our long-held view  that the  caves are a crucial part of what we offer as a city. And that is why, of course, they feature in our lottery bid for the castle: that bid making the most of our bold and rebellious past, using modern techniques to enable visitors to experience both our rich history and our unique geology.

 

So we have already acted positively to achieve improvements, and to achieve a vision and a sense of ambition and use of our caves. And of course, we’re actually starting some work towards this ambitious castle plan, by starting some work on the castle approaches and the roads around there later this year, in order to show that we as a council, once again, are prepared to deliver in order to get the wider benefit of the bids that we’re making for funding for the castle project.

 

So in terms of the caves at Broadmarsh, of course they too are important, and discussions are ongoing with Intu about this. We will continue to work with them, and the operators of the current caves attraction to seek the best solution for them within the redevelopment plans for the Broadmarsh, but I’m not going to describe what that solution might be in this council meeting, particularly, as I said before, ahead of any formal planning application, and whilst detailed negotiations are ongoing.

 

I’m really pleased that Intu realise, just as we do, how important our heritage and our history is, and again, I wish Councillor Steel every luck in putting forward his views on the Broadmarsh scheme through the informal consultation and potentially through formal processes at some point later on.

 

Council Tax Freeze Grant

 

Councillor Georgina Culley asked the following question of the Deputy Leader:

 

If the Labour group had taken the Government’s offer of Council Tax Freeze Grants in every year of this parliament, residents would be paying 8.7% less in Council Tax. That’s £85 less per year for those living in a Band A property and £127 less per year for those living in a Band D property.

 

Does the Deputy Leader of the Council believe this is a choice Nottingham’s citizens would have made if they had been given the choice and, if so, why has he carefully avoided triggering a local referendum on the subject every year since 2012 by raising Council Tax by the very maximum he is allowed to without seeking the consent of the Nottingham public?

 

Councillor Graham Chapman replied as follows:

 

Thank you Lord Mayor. I do believe people would have chosen to pay the Council Tax, and it’s partly because all of the increases have been perfectly reasonable and in line with inflation. But also, I think there are other reasons, which I will go on to. But first I want to make an observation. What is interesting about this question is what it actually reveals about Conservative party thinking. The question is stimulated by a view amongst Conservatives, not just our Conservatives but all Conservatives, that people are so short-sighted, and are so mercenary, and are only interested in money, and for that reason they would never have agreed to an increase in Council Tax. Well we take a more optimistic view of the world. And fortunately what has happened is that people fit more in with our appreciation of them than with yours. Certainly that’s been the case in Nottingham. And there is actually empirical evidence that they take our side, the more optimistic side, and it is called the electorate. Were it the case that they sided with you on this, then you would be sitting here, and we would be isolated, there’d be 4 or 5 of us sitting over there. And the people have had that opportunity year after year after year, to make their views known, and they have chosen to put 49 of us back, when there’s a very clear dividing line, and 4 of you back. So that is, if you want, the ultimate referendum.

 

But the reason people have not responded in the way you would have expected them to, is partly because they are much nicer, and they have a broader view of the world than you give them credit for. They also see the other side of a balance sheet. The other side of the balance sheet of not increasing Council Tax is another £12.6 million of cuts. And some of them may not actually want their parents stuck in a hospital bed, unable to get home because of lack of care. They may not want to see children in care not receiving their due protection. They may not want to see children’s centres closed, or libraries closed to the extent that’s been seen in other councils. They may want to see CPOs on the street, and they may actually want a council which is solvent, which this council is.

 

And finally, on the referendum, I’d point out that 49 of the 101 councils that are increasing their Council Tax and have not taken the freeze grant this year are Conservative councils. That is almost 50%. They are doing so, because they recognise as well that you cannot go on not putting your Council Tax up at the same time as having government grant cuts. So they have been very sensible, but also I’d point out that not one of them is having a referendum. And there are very good reasons why 49 Conservative councils have decided not to have a referendum: it’s because referendums are extremely costly. They create massive uncertainty: it is very difficult to budget around the outcome of a referendum. There is also a recognition that people are elected to take decisions on behalf of the electorate, and the time for judging our decisions is at the ballot box. Again, people seem to accept this, and again, there is no better evidence than the empirical evidence in this chamber that we are 49 and you are 4. We have been increasing our majority through this period of Council Tax increases, whilst you have been diminishing in number and size.

 

Private Tenants

 

Councillor Michael Edwards asked the following question of the Portfolio Holder for Community Safety, Housing and the Voluntary Sector:

 

What problems are Nottingham tenants of private landlords now suffering that require action a national level?

 

Councillor Dave Liversidge replied as follows:

 

Thank you Lord Mayor. In the past decade in Nottingham we’ve experienced an above average increase in the size of the private rented sector. At the 2001 census, it was 14% of the city’s housing; in 2011 it was 23%. Private sector is clearly becoming more important as a provider of homes for our citizens. Given the increasing role of the private sector, it’s crucial that accommodation provided is safe, is decent quality, is reasonable and affordable, and provides a secure home; particularly for families with children.

 

As the sector has increased in size and importance, so have the Council’s efforts to raise standards. We’ve created a rogue landlord campaign to find and drive out the worst landlords from the sector, and we’ve received around 1,300 requests for help within the rented accommodation sector during 2014, up by 250 on 2013. We’re making effective use of our enforcement powers to make poor landlords improve their properties, and prosecuting those who fail to comply. There have been 5 prosecutions so far this financial year. The use of 2 accreditation schemes; Unipol and the Decent and Safe Homes, helps landlords to improve and to show that they are good landlords, and that they meet the overall Nottingham standard for their properties and the management of them. In January 2014 we introduced a scheme of additional licensing for Houses in Multiple Occupation in certain parts of the city. In February we also launched the Tenants Toolkit, which advises tenants of their rights and responsibilities. With all of these things we are helping to make private renting easier and a better experience for our citizens.

 

However, there are a number of areas that we believe should be actioned at a national level to improve the situation. Firstly, the length of tenure should be longer than the current minimum offer of 6 months. The norm should be at least 3 years; we need to give private renters more security of tenure, as they have in council houses. If you have school aged children, a 6 month tenure brings enormous uncertainty and potential disruption. Children need stability in their lives, and if we are to see more children living in the private rented sector, we need to make sure that there is a minimum tenancy much longer than 6 months. We know that this is a particular issue in Nottingham from the number of people going to our housing advice service for help. The biggest cause of homelessness is assured shorthold tenancies coming to an end. 31 households were made homeless in this way in the first quarter of 2014, and in quarter 3 it’s 40. So there’s a general spread of people leaving 6 months tenures to become homeless.

 

Another area is the practice of letting agents. According to our colleagues at Notts Housing Advice, complaints about letting agents are frequent. Clients find fees prohibitive, particularly those on benefits. Housing benefits and discretionary payments cannot be used for agents’ fees. Fees are often not justifiable, particular examples include a non-refundable fee if a client fails a credit check. There are fees for renewing fixed term agreements, when there is actually very little work required in re-issuing agreements, but clients are often charged £150 for renewal. Nationally, the Property Ombudsman has confirmed that 2/3 of upheld complaints made to them by both landlords and tenants are against lettings agents. Some clearer rules on what agents can and can’t do are needed, so that people needing occupation quickly are not exploited.

 

Whilst we are making the best use of powers to improve standards, things could be vastly improved by a national licensing scheme, requiring landlords to register addresses of private rented properties, and to apply for a license to ensure properties meet at least minimum standards of safety, condition and management. This would mean landlords having to meet a minimum set of standards before letting out the house, such as smoke alarms, providing details of who is in control of the property and who to report problems and disrepair to. So, overall, whilst the Council has made considerable progress to make private renting in Nottingham, we believe that action is needed at the national level. And if we start with these 3 things, we may even get to decent homes standard in the private sector also.