Councillors spoke of their sadness as they agreed to a request by governors and the Roman Catholic church to close a primary school in Brighton.
A report to Brighton and Hove City Council’s annual council meeting said that admissions had been falling at St Joseph’s Catholic Primary, in Davey Drive, Hollingdean.
It said that the school had been under-subscribed for the past seven years as the number of children living in Brighton and Hove had decreased.
As a church school, St Joseph’s has a wide catchment area including Hollingdean and Fiveways, Coldean, Moulsecoomb and Bevendean.
The Roman Catholic diocese of Arundel and Brighton held a public consultation from November last year to January and, with the governors, decided to close the school because it was not financially viable.
The council, as the education authority, formally voted to close the school at the meeting at Hove Town Hall on Thursday (22 May).
Labour councillor Jacob Taylor quoted the diocese saying that fewer children meant that there was not enough money because funding was based on pupil numbers but costs were driven by the number of classes.
At the end of last October, the school had 210 places but only 149 pupils, meaning that 29 per cent of its places were spare.
By February, when parents became aware of the closure plans, the numbers had fallen to just 96 pupils on roll, leaving more than half the places – 51 per cent – as unfilled.
Councillor Taylor said that there were enough places at primary schools across the area to take all the pupils still at St Joseph’s.
The nearest Catholic school, St Mary Magdalen’s, in Spring Street, has places available for this September and 34 across other year groups.
The council said that it was working with the school to help families during the transition.
Councillor Taylor said: “I want to acknowledge what a sad day this is for everybody involved with the school.
“A school is not just a building where children learn. It’s more than that. It’s a community. It’s a support network. And it’s part of a shared history within an area.
“I know the diocese and the governing body have not taken this decision lightly.
“I want to send my heartfelt thanks to all the staff who have worked at St Joseph’s and have made such a huge contribution to educating and caring for our children in the city.”
Independent councillor Samer Bagaeen raised concerns about the report to the council which said that there was a “reduction in demand for Catholic education”.
Councillor Bagaeen, a foundation governor at Cardinal Newman Catholic School, the largest secondary school in Brighton and Hove, said that, as a governor of 17 years, he understood that the decision was a difficult one.
He said: “I am glad Councillor Taylor read from the diocese report because it doesn’t refer to a reduction in demand for Catholic education. The officer’s report refers to a reduction in demand for Catholic education. That I have an issue with.
“As a governor of Cardinal Newman, I can confirm that the school is oversubscribed and this is living proof that there is no reduction of demand for Catholic education in Brighton and Hove.
“I challenge both the general premise and the specific context presented in the officer’s report on the demand for Catholic education in general.
“While it is acknowledged that there has been a demographic dip in primary-age children in some areas in Brighton and Hove, the assertion that this has led to a reduction in demand for Catholic education is not universally supported by evidence.”
Four of the six remaining Catholic primary schools in Brighton and Hove were oversubscribed on first-choice applications for September 2025.
Cardinal Newman received 523 first-preference applications for its 360 year 7 places in September.
Green councillor Chloë Goldsmith said that it would be unworkable to object to a school closure when the governors wanted it to close.
Councillor Goldsmith said: “Closing any school is something I am sure none of us take any joy in whatsoever. Regardless of the circumstances, any closure undoubtedly leaves a dent in the community it serves, as is made evident by the response to the consultation.
“We as a group have strongly opposed previous school closures this administration has carried out but, as Councillor Taylor notes, this one is under very different circumstances.”
Conservative councillor Anne Meadows also said that it was a sad day to consider the school closure.
Councillor Meadows said: “We sympathise with parents who see a school with a good rating from Ofsted and they trust their child’s teachers and like the smaller class sizes.
“We all understand that. We hear you. However, we also understand the dilemma for school governors who would not have taken this decision lightly.”
She added that the school budget would be overspent because of national insurance increases affecting school budgets.
Conservative councillors abstained from the vote.
The school is formally due to close on Sunday 31 August.
This problem of falling school numbers dates back at least twenty years. One of the schools mentioned, St. Mary Magdalen, was in danger of closure until the influx of Polish migrants, bringing fresh blood to both the school and the local church. Following Brexit many of them chose to return to Poland and the numbers of new Polish migrants has fallen dramatically.
But the council should secure and maintain the school as it will certainly be needed to educate the children of the present wave of migrants. It is unlikely they will be Catholics though.
The building is owned by the Catholic Church.
Any decisions on the future of the building are down to them – including maintaining it.
I think the school should be turned into a specialist setting for children with SEN needs. God knows there aren’t enough specialist places in specialist schools or even enough specialist school in Brighton and hove for children who are in need.
Immigration has been used to plug workforce gaps, but it’s now seen as an overused and unpopular fix, with integration falling short of expectations.
We need a serious national conversation about declining birth rates. Demographics should be taught in schools—they’re central to long-term stability.
Labour shortages and school closures puzzle many, but the root cause is fewer families, especially cool Brighton types who are too cool for kids. When you exclude those who can’t or won’t have children—due to infertility, same-sex relationships, or personal choice—the pressure to maintain population falls on a shrinking group.
To avoid overreliance on immigration, those who do want kids would need to average 3 to 4 children—not the 2 most assume—to keep the population stable.
The awful Labour party prefer the immigration route.
Are you personally going to force UK families to have more children?
Until then we need immigration. Brexit means they’re not European.
You’re right that birth-rate decline is a serious issue, and it is absolutely one of the underlying causes of school closures, not just in Brighton but across much of the UK. It’s a structural trend, and yes, it deserves more open conversation.
But the framing here makes a few leaps that don’t hold up. Immigration has indeed supported the workforce in a range of sectors, including education, care, and the NHS. It is not a flawless solution, but neither is it a plot nor something unique to one party. Governments of all stripes, including Conservative-led ones, have relied on immigration because demographic realities and economic needs demand it.
People delay or avoid children for many reasons, and a modern, inclusive city like Brighton is home to all sorts of families. Fertility decisions aren’t something any council can engineer.
The idea that the Labour Party somehow chooses immigration over family policy is also a false binary. Population stability, economic viability, and cultural cohesion aren’t solved by slogans. We need affordable housing, childcare, stable jobs, and accessible healthcare if we want people to start families again. These are the policies that actually move the needle. School closures are the symptom, not the betrayal. And if we want long-term solutions, we have to look beyond finger-pointing.
Other RC schools in the area aren’t easily accessible using public transport which is routed to go via town centre.
Very sad that another school will be closing in the City, partly down to the current Administrations drive for young families to leave our city because of a lack of affordable housing, the plethora of new build flats and student accommodation. Where is the balance?
So many families tell me that they are/having moved to Worthing, Hassocks or Seaford where there are decent schools, more affordable housing & cheaper parking … and regular collection of rubbish.
Rubbish.
The falling birthrate has been a long term trend.
And you know full well that whilst the Council made the final decision it is essentially the ratification of the decision made by the Catholic Church to close it.
And if you are so against the closure why didn’t you vote against? Instead you and your colleagues sat on your hands.
Absolutely. The Labour group continues to concrete green spaces, contribute to congestion and pollution, expand alcohol licensing without considering community impact and make the city less livable for families. The Labour party were awful in opposition and are worse in power.
This is absolutely correct. If you add mass migration ( much of it illegal ) over the past 20 years where religions and cultures other than Christian are becoming part of the population, the demographic is rapidly changing so demand for Christian/Catholic state schools such as this wonderful school is going to fall.
As a resident of Brighton over the past 65 years, the City has become unrecognisable. Some changes are very positive but many are not and have driven families out with rising crime, dangerous streets, the worst proportion of drug deaths in the UK ( yes higher than Glasgow ) its no wonder this is happening.
It’s striking how the Labour council overlooks businesses—like many on London Road—almost certainly engaged in money laundering, fueling the drug trade, and taking advantage of vulnerable people. Labour seems more interested in protecting and enabling criminals than standing up for decent, law-abiding people.
What you described, Rob, is a job for the police, the commissioner of which is Katy Bourne, who is a Conservative.
Cllr Lyons seems to conveniently ignore the Conservatives’ role in failing to build sufficient housing, particularly affordable and council homes, during their leadership periods – that is well-documented. What we are seeing now is very much attributable to the Conservatives. So when many families tell him that they are moving to Worthing, Hassocks and Seaford, he can rest assured that it was his party that caused it, and the current administration is now having to clear up the mess.
Typical left wing deflections. Labour have run Brighton & Hove for the majority of the past decade but have neglected to build houses, create a safe environment for families, or reduce crime/anti social behaviour whilst incurring some of the highest parking charges, council tax & wastefulness in the country – driving working people away.
Claiming that “Labour have run Brighton & Hove for the majority of the past decade” is, frankly, a terminological inexactitude. It is also a rather embarrassing claim for someone elected to represent the city. Brighton & Hove has been under no overall control for most of the past ten years, with administration shifting between Labour, the Greens, and, unfortunately, the Conservatives. The blame is indeed shared, but your party held leadership during several of the worst years for housing delivery.
On crime and council tax, both are shaped primarily by national policy. Police budgets were gutted under Conservative governments, and councils have had to raise local taxes after a decade of central funding cuts. If families are leaving, it is not just the last twelve months they are responding to. It is years of Conservative-driven austerity and housing failure.
And here is the part you will struggle to spin away.
There is a statistically significant trend, measurable and not rhetorical. Over the past decade, the more Conservative councillors there have been in Brighton & Hove, the fewer homes were built. When your party had higher numbers, completions were consistently lower. Since Conservative representation collapsed, completions have surged. That includes more than 1,000 new homes last year alone under Labour’s majority, one of the highest totals in the last ten years.
That is not an opinion. That is Brighton & Hove City Council’s own data.
The numbers speak for themselves, Councillor. You should not ignore them.
Labour must take responsibility for their total failure in opposition—they’ve been even worse in power.
They’ve consistently held more council seats in this city than any other party, yet have shown they can’t collaborate, resort to insults, betray alliances, and completely lack direction or courage when in charge. Labour are not to be trusted.
The city’s decline lies squarely at Labour’s feet.
The facts do not support the simplicity of your claim.
Labour has only had a working majority in Brighton & Hove since May 2023. For most of the last 20 years, the city was under no overall control, with power shared between Labour, the Greens, and Conservatives. Many of the most difficult issues we face now, from underfunded schools to housing shortages and crumbling infrastructure, were set in motion under national Conservative governments, not by local councillors, whether Labour, Green, or Conservative.
You claim Labour “held more council seats than any other party,” but having the most seats is not the same as being in control. Without a majority, they were constantly negotiating with parties who often refused to work with them. If anything, that situation reflects the challenge of fractured local politics, not some failure of character.
As for decline, the reality is more complex. Brighton has suffered from a decade of austerity, cutbacks to local government funding, and national failures on housing and education. Blaming everything on one party, especially when they have only had full control for a single year, might feel good rhetorically, but it avoids the facts.
That kind of oversimplified narrative is exactly what Cllr Lyons leans on: fearmongering, spin, and distraction, and ad hominem, because it is easier than facing up to the long-term damage caused by national Conservative policy. If the facts don’t support the story, change the story. That seems to be the tactic.
Yes, Labour did make a local promise to keep schools open. That should be acknowledged. But refusing to close any schools, regardless of pupil numbers or funding constraints, is a false dilemma. It assumes the only options are “keep every school open no matter what” or “betray the city,” when in reality, the alternative is to avoid being stubborn and responsibly protect the wider school system.
If nothing is done, we are simply delaying it. That path leads to emergency closures. I don’t want that, you don’t want that, even Cllr Lyons shouldn’t want that, if he genuinely cares as an elected official. Consolidation isn’t pretty, but given the legacy left behind, the demographic trends, freefall declining birthrates across the country, it is a utilitarian approach.
1995 – Labour win
1999 – Labour win
2003 – Labour win
2015 – Labour win
2019 – Labour win
2023 – Labour win
Most number of councillors by a very long way!
Labour consistently refuses to take responsibility, instead pointing fingers and laying blame.
Yes, they didn’t have outright control until 2023, but look at what they’re doing now! Labour have most control for years and are the ones responsible for the ongoing issues with drugs, immigration, pollution, and financial mismanagement.
And let’s not forget why they lost control in 2020 – their councillors were so appalling it became a national scandal.
Labour refuses to own up to its failures. They twist the truth, lie, and simply cannot be trusted. They’ve raised council tax, shut down schools, cut off winter fuel allowances for pensioners, worsened congestion, undermined democracy, released criminals, mishandled illegal immigration – and that’s just in the last few weeks.
The issue is about more than numbers imo. It’s about honesty and integrity in politics. From what I’ve seen over the last decade it is Labour politicians who have doggedly pretended they don’t understand the limitations of minority administrations, and they have relentlessly and unfairly finger pointed and deflected blame elsewhere, despite the fact that they have consistently been the party with the largest majority, and more often than not the party forming administrations over the last 20-30 years.
Labour have led on the majority of BHCC decisions over multiple recent decades, but have convenient amnesia when they are picked up on some of the questionable decisions made, or the empty promises in their manifesto.
I agree with you on one point Benjamin, that the conservative government’s austerity agenda is the reason behind so many of the cuts to council services and the council’s financial woes. Nevertheless, Labour have manipulated the perception of Brighton being a ‘Green’ city to its advantage over the austerity years, which in my view is misleading residents when its Labour who have more often than not been running the city for so many years.
Angie, I appreciate the tone of your comment and that you’re engaging with the complexities; it is a much more honest discussion than some of the more tribal responses. I also completely agree with your point that integrity and accountability matter.
That said, I do think we’re looking at the same events through different lenses. You’re right that Labour has often held the most seats, but holding the most seats in a hung council does not equate to actual control. Locally, governance has usually required negotiation, compromise, and shared responsibility. That includes the Greens, the Conservatives, and Labour all playing roles in budget-setting and policy outcomes. I don’t think it’s fair to say one party “ran the city” uninterrupted, or without constraint.
On the “Green city” identity, I’d argue that perception came largely from the national media and was certainly cemented during the period of Green minority control. Labour likely benefited from it in some ways, but I wouldn’t call it a campaign of manipulation. Brighton is known for its progressive values and environmental focus regardless of which party is in power, and that branding reflects the city’s broader political character.
I welcome the scrutiny of all parties. I just think it’s more productive when we acknowledge the structural and national constraints that shape local decision-making, especially when cuts and falling pupil numbers force councils of all stripes into difficult positions.
Rob depends what you mean by “won”
In 2015 and 2019 for example Labour did indeed “win” the council by winning the most seats but didn’t have a majority,
And indeed not long after the 2019 election they had to relinquish leadership to the Greens because they became the largest party.
You can watch the council’s meeting on line. Both Labour’s cllrs for Hollingdean left the building before that vote. One returned just after the vote was completed, very convenient.
Labour promised in opposition to keep schools open. Once in power they close four! You just can’t trust this mob.
Indeed – though Benjamin will blame it on anyone except Labour
More telling is that our Conservative councillor has chosen not to respond to any of the facts I laid out, but instead posted a dismissive remark elsewhere. Perhaps the truth is simply too difficult for him to spin. If there is a factual inaccuracy in what I wrote, I invite you to challenge it directly, Cllr Lyons. Otherwise, it seems the facts stand, and that may be the real reason you are avoiding them.
The Conservatives oversaw a decade of cuts to education. According to the Institute for Fiscal Studies, school funding per pupil fell by nine percent in real terms. Teacher salaries stagnated under Conservative austerity, with repeated pay freezes and below-inflation rises.
School maintenance budgets were slashed under Conservative leadership, leading to unsafe and crumbling buildings. The RAAC concrete crisis exposed the scale of infrastructure neglect. Despite clear warnings, the government cut the number of schools being rebuilt each year from three hundred to just fifty.
The difficult and pragmatic decisions being made now are not the fault of the current council. The underlying causes were set in motion by the last Conservative government. No matter who was in charge locally, this situation would have arrived all the same.
The big difference, in my view, is this. There is a logical reason behind what Labour is doing now, even if it is painful. When the Conservatives were running the country into the ground, it was not out of necessity. It was pure incompetence.
Benjamin, i think i love you! That’s the most sense I’ve heard from anyone in a long time and very eloquently put.
Unfortunately Cllr Lyon is stubbornly blinkered plus he constantly claims any credit for the Conservatives for any good Council news and blames Labour for all the perceived bad. It’s an unpleasant trait but one not uncommon for a Conservative politician.
What is this strange and ardent passion for Benjamin about Bob? How do you benefit from school closures?
Mike, I understand that school closures are an emotional issue, and they absolutely should be. But let me be clear. I do not benefit from school closures, and I certainly don’t take pleasure in them.
What I do believe is that ignoring demographic collapse, pretending every building can stay open regardless of pupil numbers, and leaving schools to fail financially helps no-one, least of all the children. That is why I am arguing for honest, fact-based solutions, even when they are uncomfortable.
If we want a school system that survives and protects quality education for all, we need to plan sustainably. That means facing hard truths, not chasing convenient villains.
“spin” – That’s Labour in a nutshell
Councillor Lyons are you seriously trying to say that if the Conservatives had a majority on the council that they wouldn’t make the same decisions to close this or any other school?
And remember that the closure of St Joseph’s was instigated by the Diocese and not the council (as it’s not a council controlled school) and that the councils decision is basically a pro forma requirement.
Labour was incredibly stupid to make a manifesto commitment not to close schools but at least they are taking the hard decisions.
But making stupid manifesto commitments isn’t something restricted to Labour.
Very sad my childhood school I was going to send my son there, I’ve got a choice I wanted and to appeal. Big loss for Hollingdean and Brighton!!
7 of the past 10 years Labour have run the Council.
3 of the last 10 years Green’s have run the Council.
Labour pledged before the 2023 election not to close schools & now is closing schools with merry abandonment.
Where will the schools of the future be built?
Back again for another episode of “Correcting Conservatives, Featuring Cllr. Lyons”
This is factually misleading and omits critical governance context. While Labour may have held more seats than any other party for 7 of the last 10 years, they did not control the council for that entire period. Brighton & Hove has frequently been in a state of No Overall Control ), which means no party had a majority and decisions often required negotiation between Labour, Greens, and Conservatives.
2015–2023: No Overall Control, with shifting minority administrations.
2019–2023: Greens ran the administration as a minority.
2023–present: Labour has had a working majority.
Falling birth rates are driving school closures across England, and Brighton is no exception. The city’s under-5 population dropped by 22%, far higher than the 6% national average, as cited in Brighton’s own STL Task & Finish Group report.
School places are funded per pupil. Under-occupied schools face significant funding shortfalls and become financially unsustainable. The closures are therefore more a response to demographic shifts and funding formulas than a matter of political ideology.
Schools closing is a reaction to circumstances that have become structurally unavoidable rather than engaging in reckless policy reversal.
1995 – Labour win
1999 – Labour win
2003 – Labour win
2015 – Labour win
2019 – Labour win
2023 – Labour win
By far the largest number of councillors!
And let’s not forget why they lost control in 2020 – their councillors were so appalling it became a national scandal.
Labour pledged to keep schools open, broke that promise, and refused to take responsibility. Deceit is their hallmark.
Rob, listing past election wins without context doesn’t reflect how power has been exercised in Brighton & Hove. The council has been under no overall control for the vast majority of the last 20 years. Winning the most seats is not the same as governing. From 2015 to 2023, no party held a majority. That means every administration had to negotiate across party lines to pass budgets and decisions — including on education.
Labour did pledge to keep schools open, and that should be acknowledged. But pretending they had total control through this period is misleading. Structural issues like falling birthrates, the end of Covid catch-up funding, and a decade of national austerity shaped the current situation. These closures are not happening because Labour wants them. They are happening because the funding formula is collapsing under real-world demographic pressure.
You can shout “deceit” all you want, but that does not change the maths. If you want to stop school closures, the honest conversation is about national education policy and local pupil numbers; not recycled slogans.
There is a whole world of difference in winning the most councillors and willing a majority.
Yes Labour won in 2003, 2015 and 2019 but only because they won the most seats and not long after the 2019 election they had to cede leadership to the Greens when they became the largest party.
The Tories “won” in 2007 and the Greens “won” in 2011 but they didn’t have majorities either.
Meanwhile Brighton College seeks to expand by 25 percent by overdeveloping its small site in East Brighton and ruining a conservation area. Why not simply buy up all these school sites becoming available?
I doubt BC will get that through, there’s a really strong campaign against that one.
This was my first school, back in the 1970’s and I have a lot of early childhood memories attached to it. I’m very sad to see it close.