Consultation response form
Please use this pro forma in responding to the consultation paper or you can download this questionnaire from www.dfes.gov.uk/consultations and
e-mail your response to 1619.consultation@dfes.gsi.gov.uk.
Name: Paul
Barber
Organisation: Westminster
Diocese Education Service
Address: Vaughan
House
46
Francis Street
London
SW1P 1QN
Your response may be made public unless you indicate otherwise. Please tick box if you want your response to
remain confidential [box]
Please tick the ONE of the following boxes that best describes
you as a respondent:
LEA Community School Voluntary School Foundation School Headteacher or teacher College Principal
or Lecturer
Training Provider School
Governor College Governor Parent
Diocesan X LSC
Other
1 Do you support the
proposal that the LSC should be able to put forward proposals for the
reorganisation of 16-19 provision in an area, in the circumstances described
and following consultation? [paragraph 11]
PARTLY
Comments:
We accept the need for mechanisms which promote coherent planning of
provision in an area and accept the need for the LSC to be able to make a wider
range of statutory proposals, but this proposal has a number of aspects which
cause us concern.
The proposal seems, for the first time, to give a statutory body the
right to publish proposals to make alterations to a voluntary school. This is,
of course, unworkable and cannot be allowed without the consent of the
trustees.
2. Do you support the
proposal that proposals for the reorganisation of 16-19 provision in an area
should be subject to determination by the Secretary of State? [paragraphs 11
and 18]
NO
Comments
Currently, statutory proposals are decided by the SOC upon which all
the major planning partners in an area, including the churches, are
represented. Any mechanism which replaces this must acknowledge the place of
dioceses who are major providers of 16-19 education to be involved formally in
any process involving statutory proposals.
In addition, the current statutory guidance makes it clear that the
overall proportion of denominational places in an area may not be reduced
without the consent of the denomination concerned. We look for this provision
to be continued.
3. Do you support the
triggers for the publication of proposals by the LSC? [paragraphs 12 to 14]
PARTLY
Comments
It is a matter of some concern that, at present, dioceses are not
normally involved in either the conduct of Area Inspections, or the drawing up
of any action plan under them. In addition, Area inspections based on one LEA
are often inadequate to make judgments about the provision of denominational
provision because of the much wider catchment areas involved. We would look to
these problems to be rectified before Area Inspections became a proper trigger
for the publication of proposals by LSCs.
4. Do you support the
proposals for handling conflicting proposals? [paragraph 17]
NO
Comments
Conflicting reorganisation proposals should be considered equally at
the same time and by the same mechanism so that the best solution can be
chosen.
5. Do you support the
proposal for the Secretary of State to resolve any dispute on whether a proposal
affects the organisation of provision for an area? [paragraph 19]
Y/N
Comments
We have already commented on the appropriateness of the Secretary of
State determining proposals. We re-iterate our comments set out in 3 above of
the danger of having too narrow a definition of area, especially for
denominational place planning.
6. Do you agree with the
procedures suggested? [paragraph 21]
Y/N
Comments
If this proposal is to go ahead we look for regulations to list
dioceses among the statutory consultees, and to provide for the LSC to give
reasons if its proposals went against the responses from providers such as
dioceses.
7. Do you support the
proposal to make it easier for a good school without a sixth form to open a
sixth form? [paragraph 25]
Y/N
Comments
We are concerned that this proposal may allow individual schools to
undermine good planning in the area, especially where such a proposal may have
an adverse effect on good sixth-form college provision.
9. Do you support the
suggestion that a community school be able to publish proposals to open a sixth
form?
NO
Comments
These proposals should come from the LEA who are the providers of
community schools.
10. Do you support the
proposal for area inspections conducted by OFSTED and ALI to cover 14-19
provision, rather than 16-19 provision? [paragraph 29-31]
Y/N
Comments
We have already commented on our concerns about the possible inadequacy
of conclusions drawn from an “area” inspection where that area is too small to
reflect adequately the pattern of denominational education. Given the proposal
to inspect provision, we consider it essential that a system of nominated
inspectors be introduced to assist the adequacy and sufficiency of
denominational education in any given area.
Any other comments
Thank you taking the time to complete this questionnaire. Unfortunately, we are unable to reply to
each response individually. We will
consider all responses carefully and will make the findings of this
consultation exercise publicly available.
Please send your response
to:
Ms Jackie Bellfield
Consultation Unit
Department for Education and Skills
Castle View House
East Lane Runcorn
WA7 2GJ
Alternatively, you can download this questionnaire from www.dfes.gov.uk/consultations and e-mail your response to 1619.consultation@dfes.gsi.gov.uk