Agenda item

Consideration was given to the report of the Corporate Director of Education and the Safeguarding in Education Manager which was presented to provide Scrutiny Members with the opportunity to scrutinise the Local Government Education Services Safeguarding Policy following its annual review.

The Safeguarding in Education Manager spoke to the report and highlighted the main points contained therein.

A Member referred to paragraph 6.1 of the report and commented on bullet point 5 - Basic training requirements for all staff and volunteers - and felt this should be enhanced training and not basic.  The Safeguarding in Education Manager agreed that the word basic did not capture the level of training involved and clarified that it was an agreed level of training that all members of education settings should have, it was a comprehensive level and that all practitioners were fully aware of their responsibilities for safeguarding and what they needed to do if there was a concern and how to report that concern.

Another Member supported the view that the word ‘basic’ in relation to training requirements should be amended.

This course of action was AGREED.

The Corporate Director of Social Services advised Members that they were looking at corporate training i.e. three tier training, there would be a basic level, a medium level and an enhanced level of training.  They were currently assessing the level of staff and Member involvement and what level of training would be required and were hoping to bring forward a training programme shortly.

In response to a Member’s question regarding the timing of the removal of the annex for responding to Covid from this year’s policy. The Safeguarding in Education Manager explained that last year an annex was attached to outline how safeguarding would operate during the early stages of the Covid pandemic.  It was a supplementary annex to the policy to guide schools on what they needed to do to maintain contact with vulnerable learners as schools were in a new situation in relation to school closures.  As those procedures mirror the content of the safeguarding policy it was felt that the annex could now be removed, but should future situations arise in relation to Covid the Safeguarding in Education Manager would issue timely advice for safeguarding arrangements.

A Member enquired if it was appropriate for Headteachers to also be the Designated Senior Person (DSP) with responsibility for safeguarding.  The Safeguarding in Education Manager said that Headteachers were often a DSP and were supported by a deputy and felt they were well placed to coordinate the safeguarding arrangements in their schools. She continued that Headteachers in Blaenau Gwent schools had good relationships with their staff and had created a culture of openness amongst their staffing group and felt there was no barrier to feeling comfortable speaking with Headteachers.  Anyone raising a concern could feel assured by talking to someone with a good level of safeguarding experience. The message, reiterated through training was always to report concerns to the DSP.

A Member stated that from a previous meeting with Estyn when the DSP was the Headteacher and the second DSP was the Deputy Headteacher, it was suggested that it may be appropriate to designate a third person, in case the Head and Deputy were both unavailable.

The Committee AGREED to recommend that the report be accepted and endorse Option 2; namely that the draft policy be amended and reference to the word ‘basic’ in relation to safeguarding training be amended.