Newport City Council responded to our disclosure requests this week. They failed to comply with the statutory deadline, but some useful and interesting points emerged. Here is one of them.
The notes taken by all three panel members in Alfie’s appeal amount to three words. One is Alfie’s name, and one is completely illegible. That leaves one word! You can see the note above.
The appeal panel had several appeals that day; how did they come to a decision without notes?
It seems extraordinarily convenient for Newport City Council that the one word is a word they seek to rely on to refute one of our arguments!
The note is surprising. When three people assume the responsibility for a decision that profoundly effects the life of a child, wouldn’t you think that the decision needs to be given care and attention? Alfie lost his appeal by a majority of 2:1.
Please keep sharing the petition if you can, we’re nearly at 100,000 supporters. You are Alfie’s voice, and you are being heard.
We wrote to Newport City Council on 09.09.21 raising issues including the appeal panel’s failure to take into account a relevant issue. The issue was that one of Alfie’s parents had been hospitalised with a potentially life limiting illness. The reasons we think that relevant are discussed in previous updates.
On 23.09.21 Newport City Council replied denying all issues. They disclosed the note above. It’s not clear from the correspondence, but we infer that the document was intended to refute our assertion that the illness had not been taken into account. You can see that the word is “TURP.”
We infer this because at one point it appeared that one parent would have to attend the appeal from hospital via Zoom. Newport City Council were warned that this may the case, and some supporting correspondence disclosed. The correspondence referred to treatment abbreviated to “TURBT.” Newport City Council’s correspondence is not clear on this point, but we can think of no other reason for this document to be disclosed. So, we think “TURP” should actually say “TURBT”, and Newport City Council consider this to be evidence that the panel took account of the illness.
We presumed that the note referred to Alfie’s appeal and were puzzled as to why it would be largely redacted. Newport City Council have now informed us that the rest of the note relates to another applicant’s appeal.
Given the importance of the decisions being made, wouldn’t each appeal warrant a fresh sheet of paper? Is it curious that Alfie’s name appears at the top of the page; he wasn’t the first appellant – coincidence maybe? Maybe we are becoming paranoid, but it all seems a bit odd.
In any event, section 6.4 of the School Admissions Code requires that the factors considered “must” be recorded in the panel’s official summary letter. This issue is not referred to in the official summary letter and so, if we are following the rules, it wasn’t considered.
It has never been in dispute that the panel were aware of the parent’s illness. The question is whether it was considered relevant by the appeal panel and if so, what if any weight was given? The answer according to the official summary of the panel’s reasons is none. Therefore, it wasn’t taken into account.
We are so grateful to every one of Alfie’s 98,000 supporters for giving Alfie a voice. It makes a difference that you’re watching!
Please share again if you can.