The UK has many problems at the moment – an NHS in crisis, a crumbling road infrastructure and persistent inflation that means millions of families can’t afford the basics.
We also have a nationwide schools funding crisis, with the National Association of Head Teachers concluding that “schools are at breaking point as funding is not keeping up with the expenditure schools face” and that 66 per cent of schools were having to cut essential support staff.
We need a Labour government as soon as possible to help fix this funding crisis. However, in Brighton and Hove we have a specific problem that won’t simply be resolved by increased government funding.
We have too few primary age children and many schools are under capacity. I want to explain why this a problem and how your Labour council is going to tackle it.
Schools work to a “published admission number” (PAN) which is the number of children they plan to take each year in reception.
Some schools are “one form entry” which means they are structured to take a single classroom of children each year (and have a PAN of 30) while a few schools in our city are setup to take four classrooms (and have a PAN of 120).
The total of PANs across the city represents our capacity for primary children in our schools. In recent years a significant problem has built up – we have drastically fewer children in our city than the capacity in our schools.
It is forecast that by next September the city will have over 600 “excess places” in primary schools – equivalent to 20 empty classrooms of children.
While this might seem like a good thing to parents – more choice of schools and smaller class sizes – I must be honest with residents and explain that this is having a catastrophic impact on our primary schools.
The simple fact is that schools are almost entirely funded on a per pupil basis. A one-form entry primary school will be structured to have enough teachers and support staff for one classroom in each year group.
If they take significantly less than 30 pupils per year, they do not receive enough funding from the government to employ that many staff.
As was reported earlier in the year, primary school heads are telling us that they are having to cut staff who support children that most need help – those from disadvantaged backgrounds and those with special educational needs and disabilities (SEND).
So, while half-empty classrooms might not seem like a big problem, the truth is that it’s already having a devastating impact on our schools and, importantly, on the children who most deserve our support.
This isn’t a problem that will develop over the next few years – it is already a crisis.
Schools have just finalised their budgets for the coming year and more than half in Brighton and Hove (53 per cent) are in deficit.
Many are saying there is nothing more they can cut. That is why we must take action now, for the good of children in our city.
Our shortage in primary school numbers is partly due to a falling birthrate but it’s also because Brighton and Hove has become so unaffordable.
The sad truth is that young families often move out of the city to nearby parts of East and West Sussex because they cannot afford a decent family home in Brighton and Hove.
That’s why this Labour council is so focused on driving through a radical housing policy – building as many affordable council homes as possible, buying back units where appropriate and taking on unscrupulous landlords.
However, those measures will take years to make a material impact on the number of children in the city. That’s why we must act now to reduce primary school capacity in the city.
This will help fill up classrooms and ensure schools get the funding they need to provide a broad and supportive education to all pupils.
It won’t be easy, and some parents will understandably be upset if capacity is reduced in their area.
Over the coming months we will be sharing a plan to tackle the issue. We will be open and transparent and we will explain why we are making changes.
We will ensure that any actions taken are based around the welfare and best interests of children. If staff capacity has to be reduced in some schools, we will work collaboratively across the city to find jobs for redeployment.
The message from teachers and governors has been clear: the issue has been kicked down the road for too long and this Labour council must act in the interests of children who will be denied support if the problem isn’t addressed.
Councillor Jacob Taylor is the deputy leader of Brighton and Hove City Council and co-chair of the Children, Families and Schools Committee.
Housing is such a key foundation for plenty of challenges within the community, including this one. After talking to several councillors, I am confident that BHCC will be looking to increase their hosting portfolio whenever they can reasonably do so.
And currently, we have approximately 4,500 active full building AirBnB properties being advertised in Brighton. Of those, more than 70% of them will be empty half the year. And that’s just an estimate from data scraping, the true number will be higher.
Staffing the Royal Sussex Hospital remains a challenge as well for the same reason. We need more keyworker housing. This is particularly important when you consider RSCH is a major trauma centre, that should be ready for any emergency at all times, and one of only nine in the whole country.
And without homes, people won’t work in Brighton, so local business suffers and job offers subsequently disappear.
Being unable to fill schools is our canary down the well, let’s get things done.
The data scraping is incorrect as most properties have many duplicate listings. AirBnBs are also rarely cheap family properties as this is not what appeals to the tourism market. The family markets wants houses like in Hanover and off Lewes Road etc which have become student lets.I doubt many airbnb properties are empty as this simpy is not cost effective. They often switch over to long term lets in the winter. The issue is that in places like Burgess Hill and Worthing family homes are more plentiful and cheaper and the schools are also better. I’ve spoken to people that have moved west and north as they don’t want their kids stepping on needles in the parks or being taught there are a 100 genders in our often very poor academically schools. We needed all these school places when lots of people arrived from the EU with kids. Now these kids have grown up or left the number of places should be contracted just as they were originally expanded. The good news is hopefully this will mean only the best teachers will retain their jobs which should lead to a raising of standards.
4,500 is an adjusted figure to account for duplicated entries, such as the same property on different websites. Otherwise, we’d be looking at 5,100, and more importantly, it’s an 11% year on year regardless. It makes very little difference to the overall interpretation, however.
The data is pretty consistent when it comes to empty lets, so your statement about this is not accurate, and considering the average earning for each is close to £40,000 a year as they stand at the moment, it is not accurate to assert they are not cost-effective either, I’m afraid. The data also accounts for properties that switch between STR and LTR. I also use the lowest possible numbers to give a minimum amount to account for variance and reliability, in actuality, it is reasonable to thing that all these figures are much worse.
Unfortunately, the school’s funding is very much tied to the number of students rather than capacity or results. This means these schools have to work with less budget, and actually the opposite is likely to occur than what you suggest – we will have lower standards for our children. The best teachers are likely the ones who have the most experience and have the highest salaries. They are actually more likely to be the first to be targeted should redundancies occur.
With respect, what you perceive as good news, to me, is the opposite.
So, the answer isn’t to cut our cloth accordingly, by rationalising the number of primary schools down to match current needs. Nor is the answer to deal with the vast amount of empty and short/holiday let homes scattered about the city. Reviewing the levels of funding schools receive, and how its allocated isn’t the solution either.
No, it’s to build yet more homes in an area hemmed in by a national park and the sea. Is Labour going to increase all the other infrastructure required as well?
Young people aren’t moving out into the county – its just as expensive elsewhere round here. They’re moving north. My 25yr old moved to Manchester suburb because £800pcm gets her a two bed semi with a garden. That’s not even bedsit money in Sussex.
The investment needs to be made in redressing the drift southwards since the industrial collapse of the 70s/80s. Spend that money where its needed – in those blighted Northern ghosttowns, not on trying to get even more people to live here.
The answer to primary schools is rationalise. Spend the money more intelligently, rather than just callous Tory Cuts or blind Labour Spend.
There are a few things that can be Duncan. Some intelligent usage of brownfield sites, disused buildings, and infrastructure. Hidden Homes for example is a great example of changing old bin areas into additional flats. Creating more senior housing to allow our older residents to maintain their independence with the security of semi-supported accommodation, and freeing up social housing is another. Tightening the rules around ASB in social housing is another. Continuing to create a hostile environment to excessive AirBnB developments and purchases, another. A comprehensive urgent community response team that can self-allocate is another.
You are right though, the North is very appealing in terms of housing. What you get for your money is far more than down here in the South. People would need a reason to move and the distance could be quite difficult for many, with city and family ties to Greater Brighton being a prohibitive barrier to many. Not to mention the limited prospects up North, and and lack of an intercouncil synergetic strategy when it comes to housing. I don’t have an answer for how you’d encourage this, nor if it is the right thing to do. Something to reflect upon.
The B&H Labour manifesto for 2024 was uplifting but was clearly unrealistic in terms of council finances. Councils are going bankrupt up and down the country.
The closing of schools would be breaking a manifesto pledge.
“A Labour council will use what money is available to keep schools open.”, page 15 of the manifesto.
Can you publish head teacher salaries and I’ll show you how to fix this.
This the 21st century. Class sizes should be maximum 20. It’s time to give kids a future.
American Institutes of Research states that 18-24 is the ideal number.
My step daughter starts reception tomorrow in a class with 30 kids and a waiting list…?
Annoyingly, schools often find themselves in cleft sticks like that. Too many kids for one form entry but not enough for two. That, or they have enough kids for two form entry but this would push them over other tipping points they lack the funds for (like refurbing an extra classroom, maintaining a larger staff outside the extra class teacher, etc etc).
The same problem applied around eighteen years ago when several primary schools were threatened with closure. Then came an influx of Polish migrants which brought up the numbers. We don’t get so many from there now since Brexit.