... have a look at this document - here - it's basically ALL of the consultation submissions to the proposed closures, and is one of the documents that should go before the Full Council on the 10th March.
Councillors received this document, along with the other formal paperwork, in mid-February --- apparently because of the need to publish consultation outcomes at least three-weeks before any decision is actually taken.
All fair enough, but take a quick glance at pages 39 through to 50, all of which are individual submissions opposing the closure of High School Yards Nursery School in particular:
- page 39 is anonymised
- page 41 and page 42 is anonymised
- page 43 and page 44 is anonymised
- page 45 and page 46 is not anonymised
- page 47 is anonymised
- page 49 and page 50 is anonymised
Now, I can see the rationale in anonymising some of the earlier pages - where 'current parental/child' details have been redacted ... but I can see NO REASON why these latter submission have been anonymised: indeed one (pages 45-46) is not?
I had many of these submissions copied to me, as Opposition Group Leader, and know who most of these letters are actually from ... and all have been sent in by very prominent Early Years' specialists.
So just why have they now been anonymised in the public release of these documents?
Personally, I can see no reason other than to avoid embarrassment for the City Council.
If that is proven to be the case, then it's nothing short of a disgraceful set of actions.