Brighton and Hove campaigners complain of bias in scrutiny debate
and on Freeview 262 or Freely 565
The Parent Support Group wanted to take part in a Brighton and Hove City Council scrutiny committee discussion on proposed changes to secondary school admission rules.
The group, formed by parents living in the Varndean School and Dorothy Stringer catchment area, said that another campaign group, Class Divide, was represented and that this had been biased and unfair.
Advertisement
Hide AdAdvertisement
Hide AdClass Divide supports the changes proposed by the council while the Parent Support Group does not.


Council plans to change the Varndean and Stringer catchment area would give children from Whitehawk a better chance of going to those schools.
And children in Kemp Town would be moved from the Varndean and Stringer catchment into the Longhill catchment instead.
Another change would give children in four catchments – for Longhill, Patcham High, BACA and PACA – a better chance of going to the likes of Varndean, Stringer, Blatchington Mill and Hove Park.
Advertisement
Hide AdAdvertisement
Hide AdBut the Parent Support Group said that this could mean more than 140 children who live close to Varndean and Stringer missing out on a place at their local secondary school.


They would be split up from friends and face unnecessary journeys each day while those from further afield would also be making longer journeys than necessary to and from school but the other way.
In addition, the Parent Support Group said that this would make them more likely to miss lessons and more likely to miss out on after-school activities because of public transport limitations and cost.
The council is consulting parents, professionals and the public about its proposals until the end of the month and the plan was discussed by the council’s People Overview and Scrutiny Committee.
Advertisement
Hide AdAdvertisement
Hide AdBefore the meeting last week, the Parent Support Group asked to be represented by parent Adam Dennett.


He is professor of urban analyics at University College London and has modelled the effects of the council’s proposals, sharing his findings on the Brighton and Hove School Catchment Areas Facebook group.
The group also asked the committee to invite Exeter University economist Ellen Greaves, based on her neutral stance when she previously appeared before the committee in October.
The committee invited Dr Greaves and rival campaign group Class Divide but not the Parent Support Group. Instead, Professor Dennett spoke at the start of the meeting, in a deputation.
Advertisement
Hide AdAdvertisement
Hide AdClass Divide, which has pushed for better educational opportunities for children in east Brighton for the past five years, was invited to take part in the meeting.
Co-founder Curtis James and father of three Lewis Smith addressed the committee and were available to answer questions during the discussion.
The complaint letter said: “Class Divide has been campaigning actively in favour of the council’s proposals.
“In the interest of balance and fairness, the scrutiny committee should also have invited either the Parent Support Group or Professor Adam Dennett to the meeting.
Advertisement
Hide AdAdvertisement
Hide Ad“The Parent Support Group and Professor Dennett have conducted modelling and research of the implications of the council’s proposals and the challenges affecting the city’s school system which would have been relevant for the meeting to hear.
“Instead, the Parent Support Group was only able to contribute through a deputation which gave it less opportunity to participate in discussion.
“The decision to invite Class Divide to two scrutiny committee meetings without inviting the Parent Support Group to any scrutiny committee meetings is clearly unbalanced and constrains the ability of the committee to fulfil its role in analysing the council’s decisions.”
The Parent Support Group listed six points in their complaint to the council
Advertisement
Hide AdAdvertisement
Hide Ad• The committee did not act in accordance with its responsibility to scrutinise the executive. • There were no parent governors on the committee. • The committee did not invite a suitable range of outside experts and representatives to adequately inform its discussion. • The chairing of the meeting was biased and focused on defending the executive rather than scrutinising the executive. • The committee was not presented with a balanced explanation of the council’s proposals and no effort was made by the chair to elicit the extra information required to inform a balanced discussion. • The chair sought to present concerns raised by parents as unfounded fears without adequately interrogating the nature of parental concerns and did nothing to moderate divisive comments made by other councillors during the committee meeting.
The group said: “The council’s current consultation process in respect of changes to catchment areas and school preference criteria represents significant changes to the city’s educational landscape.
“As parents, we recognise the importance of having a good choice of schools in the city that meet children’s needs. However, these proposals have consequences and rightly need to be objectively scrutinised.
“The Parent Support Group (PSG) has been focused on raising legitimate concerns, asking questions, challenging the robustness of the process, methodology and numbers.
Advertisement
Hide AdAdvertisement
Hide Ad“However, it seems counter-intuitive and inappropriate to invite parties who have been influential in driving the council’s proposals to the scrutiny committee’s discussions, describe them as ‘independent witnesses’ and not invite the PSG.”
The chair of the People Overview and Scrutiny Committee, Labour councillor Jackie O’Quinn, said that she welcomed the interest in participating in the meeting.
Councillor O’Quinn said: “It is not always possible to accommodate everyone due to time constraints. In the case of our scrutiny committees, involvement is at the chair’s discretion.
“While the Parent Support Group was not able to contribute to the discussion on this item at the recent meeting, a deputation was made on behalf of the group by Professor Adam Dennett, meaning they were given time to make their representation to councillors.
Advertisement
Hide AdAdvertisement
Hide Ad“I felt, given Professor Dennett would speak as part of the deputation and time on this item was limited, the group would have an opportunity to put its points across outside of the discussion.
“We also had other independent witnesses, including Class Divide and Dr Ellen Greaves, an expert in school admissions from the University of Exeter, whose involvement was requested by the Parent Support Group.
“We are confident proceedings included an appropriate range of opinions, lived experiences, professional expertise and insight, which did include the deputation on behalf of the Parent Support Group.”
Comment Guidelines
National World encourages reader discussion on our stories. User feedback, insights and back-and-forth exchanges add a rich layer of context to reporting. Please review our Community Guidelines before commenting.