Archived decisions
Pinewood Infant School - review by Don Allen 02/09/04
Following the motion of the full county council on 22 July I was asked to review the decision that I had taken in respect of Pinewood Infant School. The essence of my decision following the school fire is a strategic one to decide whether or not to rebuild Pinewood Infant School. The issue of falling rolls across the County is a serious matter that does and will continue to require difficult judgements to be made. I am mindful of the County Council's constitution which states "The County Council's role is to deliver services to the people of Hampshire (and sometimes beyond) in an open, transparent and cost-effective way; acting in the best interests of Hampshire and its citizens as a whole" and the Corporate Strategy which aims to have no more than 10% surplus places county wide, in primary schools, in 2005.
I am compelled to make a cost effective decision on behalf of the County Council and that is in the interests of the whole community, including the children. I stand by my earlier decision to publish notices in respect of the closure of Pinewood Infant School. Having reviewed the available information I have waited until today to conclude my review to see if any new information was to come to hand. I can confirm that no such new supporting information that would justify reinvesting between £2 and £3 million to build surplus places has been put forward.
The forecast figures included within the report to the Education Policy Review Committee on 11 May 2004 include all known housing developments and have been discussed in detail with the planning officers of Rushmoor Borough Council. Of the 296 surplus places in the review area, 238 of these are in infant schools representing a clear imbalance between the number of places available for infant and junior aged children in the area. The closure of Pinewood Infant School would result in a reduction of forecast surplus places in 2009 to 58 (9.3%) in the area's infant schools. The combined overall reduction in forecast surplus primary places would be from 296 (19.5%) to 116 (8.7%). I consider that questions about the actual number of places in the existing or original Pinewood buildings are not material to the essential point that rebuilding the school would mean unjustifiably creating, at some cost, surplus places.
Pinewood Infant School currently provides 15 places for language impaired (LI) children. The Blackwater Valley and Hart Primary Care Trust offer support for speech and language therapy time. The trust has been consulted on the proposed relocation and have confirmed that they will work with the LEA to re-establish the provision at Southwood Infant School should the decision be taken to close Pinewood Infant School.
The governing body, headteacher and staff at Southwood Infant School have also confirmed their willingness and commitment to the relocation of the LI provision should Pinewood Infant School be closed.
With regard to the pre-school I confirmed at my decision day on 13 May 2004 that it is the intention that the pre-school should be allowed to continue to operate within its current premises.
Concern has been expressed about the walking routes to Manor Infant School. Firstly, I must take note that 34 Pinewood catchment area children currently choose to attend schools which necessitate their crossing the M3 in one way or another. Secondly, the individual routes proposed have been walked by the County Council's Passenger Transport Operations Manager (PTOM) and education officers. The inspection by the PTOM concluded that the proposed walking routes are comparable in terms of safety and distance to many other routes which children and parents presently walk to schools in the urban areas across the county. The one unusual factor in relation to one of the routes is the M3 footbridge, but this is not considered to present a significant hazard and there are alternative routes in any case. During the inspection, unaccompanied secondary aged children and accompanied primary aged children were observed using the routes proposed.
I believe that I was asked to review my earlier decision due to the fact that county council members were led to the view that new information had been put forward since my original decision. I can confirm that no new information that would cause me to change my earlier decision has come forward. The closing of any school will never be an easy decision and must be considered carefully taking into account all known information and views. I believe I have done this and have made a strategic decision on behalf of the County Council that is in the overall best interest of Hampshire children.