Closure of schools ‘alast resort’– minister

Feb 4 2008 by Paul Loraine, The Journal

THE Minister for Schools yesterday moved to quell fears that surplus places could cause a raft of primary school closures in the region.

A recent Government directive sent to local authorities suggested that schools with “excessive surplus places” may be closed and yesterday the Liberal Democrats claimed there may be as many as 2,500 closures nationwide.

Authorities were called upon by the Government to ensure that no school has more than 25% surplus places and an average of 10% surplus places is maintained across the authority area.

According to figures released by the Liberal Democrats yesterday, 42 primary schools in Durham and a further 27 in Northumberland fail to meet the government’s target.

Lib Dem schools spokesman David Laws said: “These figures show that 2,500 schools are at risk of closure – often smaller schools in rural areas.

“Government education and planning policies are threatening to decimate rural schools, in the same way that the post office network is being torn apart.

“Government policy is confused, contradictory and hypocritical. While ministers offer public reassurance about school closures, they are privately issuing instructions to local authorities to close schools and reduce places – backed by the threat of withholding money for new buildings.”

But the Minister for Schools, Jim Knight, said closing schools with excess places was a “last resort”.

“It is misleading to claim or imply that we are forcing the closure of schools in response to demographic changes,” he said.

“This would be short sighted as there are signs of the birth rate rising again. Once a school is lost to a rural community it is difficult to re-establish it in future years.

“Excessive surplus places can be poor value for money for taxpayers, parents and pupils. Local authorities have the legal responsibility for decisions to open or close schools and must presume against closing rural schools.

“Clearly in a small number of cases, for example if the school is not performing well or is not popular with parents, it may be better to spend the money on expanding nearby over-subscribed schools.

“However, closure should always be a last resort, especially for rural schools that are at the heart of their community.”

Meanwhile, council bosses echoed the belief that a school having surplus places alone does not warrant its closure.

A Northumberland County Council spokesperson said: “In our county there are more schools per head of population than any county in England.

“However, we recognise that Northumberland is different to many other areas. We do have a lot of small, rural schools and we value them. Schools are only proposed for closure under programmes aimed at providing a better educational future for the children involved.”

Claire Vasey, Cabinet Member for Children and Young People’s Services at Durham County Council, said: “I think that the important thing to remember is that every school will have reasons for surplus places, it is our duty to work with schools in order to support them in reducing surplus places where they exist.”