The debate on the Inclusive Schools petition [Sep 13]

• 'MINUTES of a meeting of the Council of the London Borough Of Richmond Upon Thames . . on Tuesday, 13 September 2011:

. . 28. Petitions

. . In accordance with the Petition Scheme, the Council had received a petition with more than 1,000 signatures, triggering a debate. The Petition had been submitted by Mr Jeremy Roddell on behalf of the Richmond Inclusive Schools Campaign.

Mr Roddell commenced his presentation by stating that the Richmond Inclusive Schools Campaign did not oppose the provision of faith based education within the Borough. The Campaign was committed to supporting improvements in quality, choice and provision of education and highlighted that rising pupil numbers indicated that two additional secondary schools would be required by 2015. He explained that the purpose of the Campaign was to promote inclusive admissions policies and fair access to school places for all of the Borough's children. It was the strong belief of the Campaign that the use of the site procured for a secondary school at Clifden Road should be made available for a community school with an inclusive admissions policy.

Cllr Evans spoke and highlighted that parents of secondary age Catholic children currently had to send their children outside the Borough to school and that it was equitable, in a fully inclusive admissions system that those parents should be able to select a Catholic secondary school within the Borough.

Cllr Eady spoke and explained that he supported the principle that secondary education needed to be reviewed across the Borough however, the priority should be to utilise the Clifden Road site for a community secondary school and make alternative arrangements for a Catholic secondary school. He expressed concern that rising birth rates in the Borough meant that parents of primary children attending link community schools did not always have their preferences accommodated by the secondary system. The environment of limited resources and drive to improve education standards was highlighted with regard to ensuring the future of fully inclusive secondary education in the Borough.

The Cabinet Member for Schools, Cllr Hodgins spoke to conclude the debate. He explained that the priority for the Borough was to raise the standard of secondary education within an inclusive system, ensuring that the needs of all children and young people were met. The issues of quality and capacity needed to be progressed jointly, particularly in light of the pressures of the existing economic climate. He referred to plans to expand pupil rolls at primary level and the aspiration for a range of educational provision to be available for all age ranges within the Borough.

The Mayor announced that in accordance with the petition scheme there was no vote on this debate. Consequently Council noted the content of the debate.

. . Question Time:

. . 5 (d) In accordance with the notice given, Cllr Eady asked the Cabinet Member for Schools:

'When and how will the Council make a decision as to the nature of the new school to be provided on the Clifden Road site?'

Cllr Hodgins replied in the following terms, 'We have offered the opportunity to the Diocese of Westminster to establish a Catholic secondary at Clifden. If it chooses to take up that opportunity and it's looking very much like it will want to, it will apply to the Secretary of State for permission to do so and to advertise that fact. There will be a six week consultation period over which the public will be able to make its views known, those will then come back and then the decision will then come back to Cabinet for consideration within two months and we will decide whether it should go forward or not.'

Cllr Eady asked a supplementary question regarding the availability of funding for development of the site and other related education projects in the Borough and how these would be prioritised based on monies available to which the Cabinet Member replied that work was ongoing on these matters.

Cllr Elliott asked a supplementary question regarding the aims of the Council to provide quality education for all residents. The Cabinet Member replied that the overall strategy was to work on behalf of all regardless of their religious background.

Cllr Nicholson asked a supplementary question about the financial position of the Diocese in supporting development at the Clifden Road site. Cllr Hodgins replied that discussions were ongoing with the Diocese and that no conclusion could be drawn regarding the matter at the current time.'

• Full minutes of the Council meeting September 13 2011