Glemsford Primary: Delegated Budget suspended as Head faces disciplinary hearing

As I have reported before Suffolk County Council have conducted an investigation into the Headteacher, Liz Steele, of Glemsford Primary School who has been suspended since January. Recently they also announced that they are trying to replace the entire Governing Body. This has led to allegations of “threats” from the County Council by Glemsford staff.

As the County Council cannot replace the Governors without the Education Secretary’s agreement it has suspended Glemsford’s delegated budget. This means Governors cannot make any financial or (crucially) staffing decisions as a County Council spokesperson confirmed to the EADT:

The matter is now before the Secretary of State and the Department for Education has confirmed that no decision has yet been made. “Pending the Secretary of State’s decision, the governing body no longer has the power to manage or make decisions regarding any of the school’s finances. In addition, it does not have any authority to make any decisions in respect of staffing - including appointment, recruitment or disciplinary procedures.”

The County Council has now announced that Headteacher Liz Steele (who has been a teacher for 39 years and due to retire this year) faces a disciplinary hearing as the EADT report:

she received a letter requesting that she attend a disciplinary hearing on May 17 and 18. The council has cited several reasons for the hearing, some of which refer to the “computer fraud”.

The report does not say if her son, James Steele, who is the school’s IT Technician and also suspended following the “free laptop” case will also face a hearing.
Pushed on the allegations of “threats” the County Council responded:

 “The county council is disappointed and concerned about comments that have been made in relation to Glemsford Primary School. “The council has now received and reviewed the report from the independent person who has been investigating these matters. This is clearly a sensitive and confidential case and it would therefore be inappropriate to provide any more detail at this stage.”  

The DfE described the case as “unusual” and said it would make a decision on the replacement of the Governing Body after looking into the circumstances.

I still think there is more to come out about this case after the hearings are concluded.