Just three families have applied to send their children to Middle Street in September after a proposal to close the troubled primary school.
And after the proposed closure was announced in January, the number of pupils remaining at the school dropped again – to just 71 by the February half-term break. The school has places for 210 children.
A council report indicated that once the 27 pupils in year 6 leave for secondary school in the summer, only 44 current pupils would remain, based on the current school roll.
The figures lend weight to the finding that the school’s future is no longer viable because funding relies heavily on pupil numbers.
The school has had a budget of just over £1 million a year but has racked up a deficit of about £400,000.
Despite the school’s difficulties, families have opposed the proposal to close Middle Street. Of 128 responses to the council’s public consultation on the proposal, 76 per cent “strongly disagreed” with the plan.
But Brighton and Hove City Council’s cabinet is expected to start the formal process of closing the school next week after because its future has been deemed to be unviable.
A report to the council’s cabinet said that the next step, if approved, would be the publication of a “statutory notice” proposing to close the school on Monday 31 August.
Representations to the statutory notice would be invited from Wednesday 8 April to Tuesday 5 May, with the final decision due to go before a meeting of the full council on Thursday 21 May.
The school is due to close because of serious concerns about the governance and financial viability.
Since last June, the school has been run by an “interim executive board” (IEB) which concluded that Middle Street “does not have a viable future”.
Just 13 people – about 10 per cent – agreed with the proposed closure during the public consultation from Monday 26 January to Monday 9 March.
The IEB did consider alternatives to closure, parents and carers were told at three consultation meetings.
At a meeting in December, the IEB considered a range of options, including forming a federation with another school or joining a multi-academy trust.
In the report to the cabinet, feedback from the public consultation showed that people wanted Brighton and Hove’s oldest school to stay open for a variety of reasons.
Some people mentioned their family connections to the school down several generations while others highlighted the school’s secular status as a reason for choosing the school.
The two nearest alternatives, St Paul’s (Church of England) Primary School and St Mary Magdalen’s (Roman Catholic) Primary School, are faith schools.
Another concern was that Middle Street is the only community school serving the centre of Brighton.
Parents and staff have also raised concerns about the way that the school was run, high staff turnover and poor financial oversight as the deficit soared to about £400,000 in a few years.
The six-figure deficit was a key part of the reason that the governors were replaced by the interim executive board last June.
The report to the cabinet said: “There was also a widely held view that the consultation and closure process had been handled in a way that was rushed and poorly communicated and that the resulting instability had itself contributed to families leaving the school, further worsening the roll position.
“Several respondents suggested that the council’s actions may have been short-sighted and questioned whether the process had been conducted with a view to financial or property considerations rather than educational ones.”
The council would have to seek permission from the Department for Education before it could sell the site or turn it into housing.
In the report, the council said that it was confident that pupils would find places in other schools because there were 534 places at schools within a mile and a half of Middle Street.
The nearest community school, Carlton Hill, has one space in its current year 1. Queen’s Park Primary School has spaces in all year groups.
Should the school close, 35 staff jobs would be at risk, with 21 people qualifying for redundancy. This could cost the council about £270,000 on top of the £400,000 deficit which would be the council’s responsibility.
The council’s cabinet is due to meet at Hove Town Hall at 2pm on Thursday 19 March. The meeting is scheduled to be webcast.
Sad really but the reality is that no kids equals no school.
I sadly agree. Following that chain of thought to the roots, I think the main issue is affordable housing and a local job market, which supports families. There are a few things in the pipeline that I think will help steer this, like the upcoming C5 class, the setup of a housing ALMO, the removal of the two-child benefit cap, and further opportunities in a devolved area to do more strategic-level building of homes.
Unfortunately, these all take time, and won’t be in time to save this particular building.
Why would families apply to a school which has been earmarked for closure? A self-fulfilling prophecy. The danger now is retaining the property in public ownership for the benefit of the community. Housing might not be the best option given the proximity of public houses and the recently restored Hippodrome concert venue.
Benjamin, I get the point you’re making about housing and jobs affecting whether families live in the city, but I’m not convinced that throwing policy buzzwords at the problem is the long-term fix for this particular situation.
Middle Street didn’t lose pupils because Brighton suddenly stopped having families overnight. The report itself points to governance problems, high staff turnover, and a rapidly growing £400k deficit. When parents see instability like that, they vote with their feet and move their kids elsewhere. Once confidence goes, numbers drop fast.
Even if more affordable housing appeared tomorrow, families still have to *choose* the school. If a school has financial problems, constant leadership changes, and uncertainty about whether it will stay open, most parents understandably won’t risk their child’s education there.
There’s also a wider issue in Brighton: there are already hundreds of spare primary places across nearby schools. Creating more families through housing policy doesn’t automatically mean those families will fill *this* school rather than the others that are already stable and established.
So while housing and jobs matter for the city overall, they don’t really address the immediate structural issues that got Middle Street into this position. Fixing school leadership, financial oversight, and long-term planning across the whole local school system probably matters more than waiting for big national policy changes to filter down years from now.
In short: more families might help the city, but they won’t necessarily save a school that parents have already lost confidence in.
Again, not the point I was making. Again, your chatbot is mistaken. Again, I have to remind you not to rely on it.
Benjamin, the issue you keep pointing out isn’t the tool — it’s the pattern in your responses.
Whenever something lines up with what you’re saying, there’s no problem with it being used. But the moment you’re challenged or something doesn’t support your point, the focus suddenly shifts to blaming the source instead of addressing the argument itself. That pattern keeps repeating whenever you’re called out.
At that point it stops looking like a genuine criticism and starts looking like a way to deflect from the actual point being raised. If the standard is that a source can’t be relied on, then that standard should apply consistently — not only when it’s convenient.
Some Guy made an excellent example in a previous article that rebuts this repeated post. I’ll let that stand up on its own merit.