Wrthi'n llwytho
Y penderfyniadau fel y mae cofnodion y cyngor yn eu cofnodi. Bydd crynodeb mewn iaith glir yn dilyn pan fydd wedi'i ysgrifennu.
RESOLVED That the Cabinet decision be upheld.
Councillor Claire George attended as a Local Member for Agenda Item 5 - Review of School Catchment Area for Johnston, Tiers Cross and Neyland.
The following declarations of interest were made in respect of Agenda Item 4 - Review of School Catchment Area for Johnston, Tiers Cross and Neyland: Councillor Alan Dennison declared a personal interest by virtue of the fact that he was a Governor at Milford Haven School. Councillor Aled Thomas declared a personal interest by virtue of the fact that he was the Chair of Governors at Johnston School. Councillor Maureen Bowen declared a personal interest by virtue of the fact that her partner was a teacher at Henry Tudor School. Councillor Viv Stoddart declared a personal interest by virtue of the fact that she had relatives who were teachers in the County’s Secondary Schools. Councillor Bethan Price declared a personal interest by virtue of the fact that she was a Governor at Ysgol Penrhyn Dewi and she had family members there.
Mr John Terrick read a statement out on why parents chose Haverfordwest High School over Milford Haven School. This included GCSE results, that Milford Haven School did not have a Sixth Form and the available extracurricular clubs that Haverfordwest High had. He disputed that Milford Haven was not at capacity and that the results of the catchment area consultation from 2018 were not considered. John Terrick said that there had been admission refusals to Milford Haven School when the report said there were not; these refusals had occurred due to capacity issues. Capacity figures at Haverfordwest High were 98% including Sixth Form figures and 92.6% without. He stated that 206 pupils in Milford Haven’s catchment area went to Haverfordwest High and Milford Haven would be at capacity if these students went there. John Terrick concluded that parents felt that they were not being listened to by the Council. The Chair thanked John Terrick for his comments.
Y penderfyniad fel y'i cofnodwyd
RESOLVED That the Cabinet decision be upheld.
As the organiser of the call-in, Councillor Thomas noted that he had been dealing with this topic since he was elected, and he thanked officers for addressing the concerns raised in the call-in. He emphasised that he would have liked to contribute at the Cabinet meeting, and this would be a reoccurring annual issue. He concluded that the need for Milford haven School to have a new build led to parents not wanting to send their children to the school. To add to this, Councillor Claire George relayed that her residents highlighted that her residents noted the environmental benefit of a school bus over individual cars to school. Her residents were concerned about how safe buses were and pupils walking to school from the town centre and that pupils needed to wait for public buses to pick them up. In response to the points raised in the call-in, Councillor Guy Woodham, the relevant Cabinet Member for Education & Welsh Language noted that they could look at safeguarding measures for pupils on public buses. Historically, there were problems with the concessionary element of transport for learners and spaces for learners on buses would quickly go. He noted that Cabinet made people aware what the rules and regulations were in the legislation and the authority applied this. The School Transport Policy for September 2025 was approved in October 2024 and Councillor Woodham agreed that this could be reviewed to ensure that the correct provision was being provided. When Full Council changed the catchment area, Councillor Woodham noted that there was a transition period for the learners being removed from the Haverfordwest High catchment; these learners were provided with school transport. He noted that the Council website highlighted that parental choice for schools did not guarantee free school transport. He apologised to Mr John Tennick for not responding to his email on this topic. Councillor Woodham noted that there had been a £400,000 overspend on school transport for 2024/25 and changing the catchment area would impact this. He concluded that he would be happy to bring the School Transport Policy to Police & Pre-Decision Overview and Scrutiny Committee in September 2025. Regarding the current School Transport Policy, the Integrated Transport Unit Manager clarified that the Council had a statutory duty to provide transport to schools for students of compulsory school age, live over three miles away from their nearest school, and be within the catchment area delegated by the Council. In terms of concessionary transport, the Council had a Spare Seats Policy where spare seats on a bus meant that the Council could offer concessionary travel passes. He continued that this policy had been revised a lot over the last few years, and it was clear regarding concessionary travel and the size of the bus provided needing to be suitable to accommodate the eligible pupils. In the report to Cabinet in February 2025, the Integrated Transport Unit Manager highlighted that it stated that the Council was saving money by not needing to provide school transport to Haverfordwest from Neyland, Johnston and Tiers Cross. £228,000 was spent annually transporting children from Neyland and Johnston to Milford Haven School; it would cost £333,000 transporting them to Haverfordwest High. He said that these savings were used to cover the deficit and there was a shortage of bus drivers in Pembrokeshire; therefore, they would struggle to provide additional routes. In response to the points raised, Councillor Thomas reiterated that investments needed to be made at Milford Haven School to address this issue. He noted that 29 out of 32 Year Six pupils at Johnston School will go to Haverfordwest High so altering the catchment area did not have an impact and reiterated that parental choices saved the Council money. He concluded that a short-term solution, for example, ‘clocking in and out’ for the school bus or concessionary passes for school buses to schools near each other like Haverfordwest High and Caer Elen. With regards to special educational needs, James Parkin queried if these were equally provided at both schools and how much power parental preference had. In response, the Integrated Transport Unit Manager confirmed that the School Transport Policy had an exception for children who were unable to attend a classroom. He added that pupils attending Haverfordwest High from 2018/19 with a sibling already there was allowed to continue receiving free school transport there. He concluded that the Learner Travel Measure (Wales) highlighted that parental preference for their child to not go to the nearest suitable school meant that the child was not eligible for free school transport. Regarding extracurriculars, Councillor Dennison queried what extracurricular activities Haverfordwest High had that Milford Haven did not as this was a parental argument for parents sending their kids there. Additionally, he noted that there would be a demand for parents wanting to send their children to Milford Haven School when the new build is completed. With regards to the ‘card system’ Councillor Thomas suggested, Councillor Dennison said that this would be expensive and would have to be implemented on all buses which would be expensive. In response, the Director of Education clarified that Haverfordwest High’s extra curriculars were held before and after school and include numerous sports and volunteering clubs and subject based clubs like art and languages. Milford Haven had similar school clubs and both schools offered the Duke of Edinburgh Award which was run at Pembrokeshire College by the Council. He noted that the main difference between the two was that Haverfordwest High had more facilities. The Chair emphasised that the Committee was meeting to discuss the catchment area, and not which school was better. On invitation from the Chair, John Tennick addressed the Committee. John Tennick emphasised that Haverfordwest High had a Sixth Form and an active rugby club which Milford Haven did not. He concluded that the Committee should ‘know all the facts’ which he stated that the report did not include. Councillor Dennison disputed claims that Milford Haven’s education was not on par with Haverfordwest High as two Milford Haven graduates went to Oxbridge last year. In response to claims about the report’s inaccuracies, the Director of Education clarified that it explained the situation in both schools. There was an admissions issue with Haverfordwest High as there were 43 refusals which will go through an appeals process. He referenced how the catchment policy was explained in the report with siblings and catchment feeders and Haverfordwest High was 80 spaces short if pupils did not move from the school. He concluded that there could be up to 16 pupils transitioning to the school mid-term. Regarding the claims of the report being inaccurate, Councillor Woodham stated that they tried to make the data as accurate as possible, but it could be interpreted differently. With regards to Milford Haven School’s new build, Councillor Woodham emphasised that the Council had tried to start construction on this, but external factors prevented this. Welsh Government will provide most the funding for this, but they had concerns which needed to be addressed so construction was unlikely to start until 2028. In response to a question from Councillor Price regarding why the catchment areas were changed, the Director of Education confirmed that it was changed after a consultation where 50% agreed with the catchment change, 19% did not and he rest were ambivalent. Three schools were reduced to two (Haverfordwest High and Milford Haven School) and Milford Haven School’s Governing Body opted for their Sixth Form to be closed with a ministerial decision. To add to this, the Chief Officer for School Resource & Governance said that Estyn were critical of the authority in 2011/12 due to the excess number of secondary schools and two of the three secondary schools for Haverfordwest and Milford Haven were half empty. In 2017, Full Council voted in favour of reorganising Haverfordwest’s secondary schools. Councillor Stoddart emphasised that changing the catchment areas would negatively impact Milford Haven School. She noted that parental preference was important, but she queried why were parents happy to pay for this transport and making this choice. Councillor Stoddart reiterated that the school needed a new building and the pupils at Milford Haven School felt left behind because their school lacked the facilities that other schools had. If the Cabinet decision was reversed, this would further delay Milford Haven School’s new build; therefore, she was in favour of the Committee voting to uphold the Cabinet decision. Councillor Jamie Adams concurred with the comments raised by Councillor Stoddart and added that when he last visited Milford Haven School eight years ago it needed investments. He noted that reverting the Cabinet decision would delay these investments and Welsh medium education needed to be considered for the town. Councillor Adams said that reverting the decision would also undermine the Full Council decision from 2017. With regards to feeder schools, Councillor Adams queried if they were matched up in terms of capacity from feeder schools. In response, the Chief Officer for School Resource & Governance stated that Milford Haven School could accept 252 pupils annually and Haverfordwest High could accept 306. Regarding the call-in, Councillor Alec Cormack noted that it seemed to criticise the catchment area which were used as planning tools for future planning. There needed to be evidence to change catchment areas, and he reiterated that if the Cabinet decision was not upheld then this would delay the new build for Milford Haven School. Councillor Dennison noted that there were fewer students attending Milford Haven School which meant the school had a smaller budget and would have to make staff redundant. A Motion was Moved by Councillor Aled Thomas to the effect: The Committee: 1) Uphold the decision of Cabinet. 2) Recommends that that Policy and Pre-Decision Overview and Scrutiny Committee conduct a review of the adequacy of the schools transport policy and report to Cabinet at the earliest opportunity. Seconded by Councillor Nick Neumann. Councillor Adams stated that the Motion was asking for things to be actioned that were already planned to be, so he was not in favour of the Motion. Regarding parental preference, Councillor Marc Tierney noted that he had asked the Education Team about why parents chose schools outside their catchment area. He suggested working with parents to understand their views on transport services and education provisions in the future. He queried how the Education Team looked at this now. In response, Director of Education stated that concerns were taken seriously and concerns regarding admissions and transport, they considered schools in other areas and were done on a case-by-case basis. Regarding the Admissions Code, he said that the Council had to make arrangements for parental choice to be exercised but parents had to explain why they want their child to go to an ‘out of catchment area’ school. Local authorities must comply with that preference subject to the exceptions that are set out in the 1988 Education Act. To add to this, the Chief Officer for School Resource & Governance said that appeal applications provided comprehensive information why parents wanted their children to go to Haverfordwest High instead of Milford Haven. The vote, undertaken by way of a roll call, was lost. The votes were recorded as follows: For the Motion – Councillors Aled Thomas, Nick Neumann and Rhys Jordan [3] Against the Motion – Councillors Alec Cormack, Alun Wills, Anji Tinley, Alan Dennison, Maureen Bowen, Viv Stoddart, Sam Skyrme-Blackhall, Jamie Adams, Marc Tierney and Bethan Price [10] Abstaining – Mr James Parkin, Rev. John Cecil and Mrs Nicola Moore [3] A Motion was Moved by Councillor Viv Stoddart to the effect: That the Cabinet decision be upheld. Seconded by Councillor Alan Dennison. The vote, undertaken by way of a roll-call, was carried. The votes were recorded as follows: For the Motion – Councillors Rhys Jordan, Alec Cormack, Alun Wills, Anji Tinley, Alan Dennison, Maureen Bowen, Viv Stoddart, Sam Skyrme-Blackhall, Jamie Adams, Marc Tierney and Bethan Price [11] Against the Motion – Councillors Aled Thomas and Nick Neumann [2] Abstaining – Mr James Parkin, Rev. John Cecil and Mrs Nicola Moore [3] RESOLVED That the Cabinet decision be upheld.
Rhaid i gynghorwyr ddweud pan fydd ganddyn nhw gysylltiad personol â rhywbeth sy'n cael ei drafod, fel swydd, eiddo neu aelod o'r teulu. Mae buddiant sy'n rhagfarnu yn ddigon cryf i'r cynghorydd adael yr ystafell fel arfer a pheidio â chymryd rhan.
Caiff datganiadau eu darllen o'r cofnodion unwaith y byddan nhw wedi'u cyhoeddi.
Yn rhestru cynghorwyr presennol y cyngor yn unig. Nid yw aelodau cyfetholedig, swyddogion a chyn-gynghorwyr yn cael eu dangos.