Angry parents asked a number of key questions about the failings that led to the proposal to close Brighton’s oldest school at a public consultation meeting this week.
They were told that the budget deficit at Middle Street Primary School had soared from about £250,000 in the past financial year to more than £425,000 in the current financial year.
And, with falling pupil numbers the outlook would be worse, with no realistic way of paying off the debt.
Most of a school’s income is linked to pupil numbers – and fewer than 135 children are now at the school which has a capacity of 210. This time last year there were 193 children.
The key details were spelt out by Richard Barker, head of education at Brighton and Hove City Council.
He was faced with a flurry of question as furious parents accused the council of doing too little too late.
Mr Barker said that he was constrained in what he could say for various reasons as parents asked about head teacher Rob Cooper, who has been on leave since at least the start of the current school year.
There were also questions about the former board of governors who were replaced by an interim executive board (IEB) in June – a move that is only permitted at a “school causing concern”.
Middle Street is believed to be the first school in Brighton and Hove to have an IEB, a step that had to be signed off by the government’s Education Secretary Bridget Phillipson.
One parent said that this had happened only because parents whose concerns were ignored by the school and the council then complained to the Department for Education (DfE).
As well the plummeting number of children attending the school, one parent said that 90 per cent of the staff had left in the past two years.
But to try to put the closure down to pupil numbers and the finances would be a travesty, a parent said, criticising the failure of the culture over the past three years.
The meeting was told: “The school had a very specific problem with its management – but this is being treated like a demographic issue.”
Questions were asked about the head’s previous employment and whether references were checked.
Mr Barker said: “We hear what people are saying. The process doesn’t necessarily mean that everyone will get the answers that they want.
“There are some things we can talk about and there are some things we can’t talk about. We can’t talk about individuals.”
Parents complained about the council’s response that its hands were tied and it couldn’t do or say anything. It was paying lip service only, parents said, and there was a lack of transparency.
Also, a lack of communication had caused much uncertainty, the meeting was told, even though parents were now sent more emails than ever. None of them told parents what they wanted or needed to know though.
Among those present at the meeting was Green councillor Chloe Goldsmith. She heard the praise for interim executive head Rachel Kershaw and interim head teacher Michelle May for doing their best and going above and beyond the call of duty.
But before the interim board was appointed, parents said that the council did not do enough to keep children safe.
Mr Barker said that the council took steps to deal with matters that had to be addressed. Officials issued a warning notice to the governors last April and they were removed and the IEB was appointed in June.
It emerged that some children at Middle Street had taken up their places when St Bartholomew’s closed in 2024 and were now being forced to find a third school in two years.
The consultation on whether to close Middle Street Primary School is due to end on Monday 9 March, with the results to be presented to the council’s cabinet on Thursday 19 March.
The cabinet will be asked to decide whether to go ahead with the formal closure process and if, as widely expected, it does then there will be a further four-week consultation.
This is scheduled to run from Wednesday 8 April to Tuesday 5 May before a final decision to be made by the full council on Thursday 21 May.
The first consultation meeting was held at the school on Tuesday 10 February, with another meeting due to be held there from 9am to 10.30am next Wednesday (25 February).
A final consultation meeting is due to be held online on Wednesday 4 March at 6pm, the only one taking place at a time suitable for parents with daytime jobs.
Outside the meeting, one parent said that, unusually, the school governing body had not had a council-nominated member for some time and that parents had contacted the council to share their concerns.
The council had appeared to treat those raising concerns as “just a bunch of moaning mums” and ignored other warning signs such as pupils being pulled out of the school and high staff turnover.
One result of the high staff turnover was an increase in the cost of finding temporary staff to cover – and this alone should have been a red flag to the council.
It has not been possible to contact the current head teacher Mr Cooper for comment. He is understood to remain on paid leave.
Speaking as a parent with a child moving to senior school next year, these themes are depressingly familiar. An education department refusing to provide basic data, who fail in school improvement plans and oversee dodgy ‘consultations’ where the result is predefined. This is overseen by the Labour group of councillors, who cannot stop messing about with school admissions (against expert advice), who trust their Councillors so little they have to tell them how to vote, and who vilify entire groups of parents if they disagree with the Labour group.
It is outrageous that some children have had to change schools twice. The simple message is families cannot trust the council education department and Brighton Labour Councillors with our children’s education. This will affect how I vote at the next council election. I hope it does for others.