Recap

Alfie’s complaint about the school admissions and appeal process is with the Public Services Ombudsman for Wales.  If the Ombudsman agrees with any of the points raised, they can recommend that Alfie has a place at the school or a second appeal. 

We have no idea how long this will take.  We have asked the Ombudsman if they would expedite the matter as Alfie is not in school, but we have no indication currently of whether the matter will be expedited or how long it is likely to take.

If the ombudsman recommends a fresh appeal, it is up to Newport City Council whether Alfie gets a fresh appeal.  If Alfie has another appeal, he still has to persuade the Appeal Panel that he should have a place at the school.

The school is not selective, this is not about sharp elbowed parents trying to obtain an advantage for their offspring.  It is simply about Alfie being the only child excluded from his local state high school.

Alfie’s appeal was largely about whether the prejudice to Alfie of being singled out for exclusion and banished to a distant school, is greater than the prejudice to the school of taking one additional pupil amongst 1,867 pupils.

 You may recall that Alfie is the single in-catchment child not to be offered a place; Newport City Council only needed to admit one extra child to include all the in-catchment children.

Prejudice to the School

Newport City Council have used their discretion to increase the intake to the school by thirty pupils this year, as building work is under way to expand the school. 

The school have additional temporary classrooms to accommodate the additional children. The year 7 classes range from 29 to 32 pupils.  The school were able to take thirty over their published admission number, but Newport City Council would not exercise that same discretion to make it thirty-one, so that all the children were included.

The prejudice to the school is minimal, and temporary at that. 

Prejudice to Alfie

The prejudice to Alfie is really about the effect on Alfie’s mental and emotional wellbeing; something that is much in focus in these challenging times.  We think that what happened to Alfie is quite a big rejection at a very impressionable age. 

Evidence Excluded

The effect on Alfie’s mental and emotional health was put to the Appeal Panel.  Alfie’s GP wrote a letter supporting our concerns, as did Alfie’s primary school.  But Newport City Council classified the effect on Alfie’s mental and emotional health as medical evidence and advised the Appeal Panel that this evidence could not be considered unless it came from a medical consultant.  It seems that evidence from a GP is not good enough for Newport City Council.

The Appeal Panel did not consider Alfie’s mental and emotional health.

It is entirely a matter for Newport City Council whether they exclude medical evidence in this way.  The Welsh Government has produced a code which sets out the parameters within which Local Authorities must develop their policies in relation to education admission appeals.  The code does not require the Local Authority to fetter it’s discretion in this way.  It is left to the local authority to make it’s own rules about what evidence an Appeal Panel can consider.  However, the code specifically envisages evidence from GPs or other health professionals. 

Effect of Excluding Evidence

In the spirit of positivity, we made enquiries about obtaining evidence from a medical consultant in case Alfie’s complaint to the Ombudsman is upheld.  We met with Alfie’s GP who advised that the appropriate medical consultant would be a child psychologist.  However, the waiting list is measured in years.

We have made enquiries about obtaining an appropriate report privately.  Leaving aside the issue of what will no doubt be a four-figure bill, it seems that child psychology is a small and very busy profession.  We have so far been unable to find anyone who can assist within a reasonable period of time.  So it appears that it will not be possible to present the evidence in the form required in the time available.

Conclusion

Newport City Council’s rule, excluding medical evidence from GPs and other health professionals prevents relevant evidence being considered by Appeal Panels.  The rule is unnecessary, illogical and the direct cause of injustice.