Agenda item

Jess Bailiss introduced the report (Agenda Item 5), which aimed to review and assess the membership and Constitution, which the Schools’ Forum was required to do on an annual basis. It was confirmed that there had not been any changes to legislation requiring a change to the Forum’s current practise.

Table 1 showed that the number of pupils in each sector had remained broadly the same and therefore no changes were proposed to the structure of the membership at this time. No changes were proposed to the Constitution at the current time. The proposal was for the Forum to approve the membership and the Constitution from September 2024 and once approved the Schools’ Forum webpage would be updated accordingly.

Trevor Keable asked for confirmation that section A - 1.2 and 1.3 of the Schools’ Forum Constitution was correct, which set out areas the Local Authority (LA) must consult the Schools’ Forum on annually in relation to school funding areas and areas that were decided by the Schools’ Forum. Melanie Ellis believed that this had relevance to agenda item seven on the agenda (Surplus School and School Balance Statement), where the LA had made a proposal and the Schools’ Forum were being asked to make a decision. It was confirmed that the Schools’ Forum would be required to make the decision and vote on this item. Trevor Keable felt it was important for the Schools’ Forum to be clear on the distinct differences between the items set out in section A (1.2 and 1.3) of the Constitution.

Trevor Keable referred to section 2.4 of the Constitution which set out the non-school members of the Schools’ Forum and asked how the decision was made regarding how this membership was arranged. He noted that both the Roman Catholic Diocese and Church of England Diocese were mentioned in the DfE Bill however, this also suggested there could be other representative groups too and he queried why there was no one from a Mosque, given West Berkshire had a large Asian population. He was of the understanding that the Schools’ Forum decided on the non-school membership however, queried what the logic had been for choosing the existing group. Jess Bailiss confirmed that the non-school membership was based on what was suggested in the Schools’ Forum Regulations 2012 and Education Skills and Funding Agency’s Good Practice Guidelines, and that this was likely decided when the West Berkshire Schools’ Forum was formed. Jess Bailiss would look into this and why other faith groups were not represented.

Reverend Mark Bennet reported that several schools in West Berkshire were either Church of England or Roman Catholic schools. There were not any Muslim schools in the district although there were pupils. It depended on if the membership was based on the school level or community level. He was not against wider representation however, expected the membership was based on school level and this was the reason why the Roman Catholic Diocese and Church of England Diocese were represented on the Forum whilst others were not.

RESOLVED that Jess Bailiss would look at how the non-school membership was formed and why only the Church of England Diocese and Roman Catholic Diocese were represented currently.