Agenda and draft minutes

To remind Members of the need to record the existence and nature of any personal, disclosable pecuniary or other registrable interests in items on the agenda, in accordance with the Members’ Code of Conduct.

The Chairman stated that all Members of the Committee had been lobbied on Item 3a and confirmed that whilst they may have listened to those views, Members would retain an open mind and consider the information in the report and shared at the meeting before reaching any conclusions.

Councillor Billy Drummond declared that he was a trustee at St Bartholomew’s School. As his interest was personal and not prejudicial or a disclosable pecuniary interest, he determined to remain to take part in the debate and vote on the matter.

Councillor David Marsh declared that his wife was a governor at St Bartholomew’s School and his son was a pupil there. As his interest was personal and not prejudicial or a disclosable pecuniary interest, he determined to remain to take part in the debate and vote on the matter.

Councillor Clive Taylor declared that he was a governor at Calcot Schools. As his interest was personal and not prejudicial or a disclosable pecuniary interest, he determined to remain to take part in the debate and vote on the matter.

To consider the call-in request to review the Individual Decision concerning the Section 19 Statement and Educational Neglect Policy.

The Committee considered the call in of the Individual Executive Member Decision (ID4816) on 11 June 2026 on the Section 19 Statement and Educational Neglect Policy Statement.

Since Councillor Dominic Boeck was one of the Members who had asked for the decision to be called in, he asked Councillor Owen Jeffery to chair the meeting during discussion of this item. (Councillor Jeffery assumed the chair.)

Councillor Heather Codling (Deputy Leader and Executive Portfolio Holder for Children and Family Services), and Ashley Milum (Service Director – Education) gave a summary of the policy and the reasons for its approval:

·       It was explained that the policy had been developed to meet the Council’s legal duties, and to provide a clear framework for everyone working with children in West Berkshire.

·       The policy focused on keeping children safe, supporting their education and keeping them in a mainstream school wherever possible.

·       The aim was to make the right decision for each individual child and to work constructively with parents.

·       The policy and associated statements were aligned with statutory guidance.

·       Although the policy had not been coproduced due to its statutory nature, the Council regularly engaged with the Parent Carer Forum and was in contact with families about policy development and practice more broadly.

·       Parents were thanked for taking the time to read the policy and provide feedback - changes had already been made in response to the feedback received, and a revised draft of the policy had been issued in the supplementary agenda pack.

Councillor Dominic Boeck presented the reasons for the decision being called-in and the proposed alternative course of action:

·       Members considered that such an important policy should have been subjected to scrutiny prior to approval.

·       Sufficient numbers of parents had raised concerns that Members believed the decision should be called in and the policy given proper scrutiny, so all parties had confidence in the final version.

·       Although families had not been given an opportunity to help shape the initial policy, it had since been reviewed and amended, taking account of feedback received, which demonstrated the value of co-production and scrutiny,

·       Co-production and scrutiny prior to approval would have represented a better use of everyone’s time and would have given parents greater confidence in the outcome.

·       It was stressed that good scrutiny and co-production led to better decision making and better use of resources.

·       The proposed alternative course of action was to take the revised version of the policy – incorporating any further changes requested by the Scrutiny Committee – back through the approval process.

Other Members who had submitted the call-in raised the following points:

• West Berkshire Council was seeking to improve educational attainment of disadvantaged children, which would require a seismic change, drawing on all available resources.
• While some individuals had been able to contribute to the policy, others had not, and it was suggested that everyone should have the chance to be involved.
• Members sought clarification as to whether the policy sought to change the point at which schools handed  ...  view the full minutes text for item 15.