Sir, – Your recent coverage and letters (including one from Anne Skeoch, previous Chair of Governors), concerning events at Richmond School referred to and commented on a document of which I was the author.

The report was not secret but it was private and confidential in response to a complex and multi-faceted complaint by the former Chairman of Governors who, since receiving the document, has confirmed that she has no desire to take the matter further. It is important to note that my investigation and the resulting report was specifically into issues raised in the complaint – it was never intended to be an assessment of the county council’s handling of events.

I spent a lot of time with the complainant and officers involved to understand the situation. The press is full of stories of local authorities trying to cover up the truth and not wanting to face up to lessons to be learnt. That was not the case and both senior managers and individual officers involved were keen to consider my views and take away what they could as learning points. So there was not a whitewash or a cover up, in fact the opposite.

My investigation established that the warning notice issued to the then Board of Governors was absolutely a proportionate and appropriate action at the time . Yes, I suggest, with the benefit of hindsight there may have been other actions the council could have taken at an earlier stage. For them to work those involved, including the Chair of Governors, would have had to respond differently and in a way the local authority had no control over. The issue was a deteriorating relationship, not caused in any way caused by the local authority and having already tried mediation, influencing and supporting, whilst issuing a warning notice was a serious step, there was simply no other option at that point in time.

In her letter to you, Anne Skeoch makes a number of comments which are not correct.

I did not find that any, certainly not “ 11 planks of the notice “ to be unsafe. I found two relatively minor areas of inaccuracy in the text of the Warning Notice which made no difference. Nor is “the list of failure long” and there is no reference at all to “incompetence” by anyone. Rather there are some learning points with the conclusion that earlier and different intervention on behalf of the local authority may have mitigated the need for the Warning Notice but it may also have made no difference, there is no way of knowing.

I certainly found no evidence of “arrogance ”amongst local authority officers who contrary to Anne Skeoch’s claims have a lot of respect for, and fully appreciate the valuable and at times difficult job which governors undertake and the skills they need.

“Good governance in local authority maintained schools ” was not “rendered unsafe” by my report's findings. In fact Ofsted in their inspection of Richmond School last month received a copy of the report and in their inspection outcome supported the local authority’s actions. Their outcome further confirmed leadership and management as good and commended the work of both the IEB and the local authority.

Finally the apology from Richard Flinton, chief executive, in his letter to Anne Skeoch, did not relate to the issuing of the warning notice but instead was for “any difficulties caused” to her where our handling of issues specific to her could have been improved.

These events are now history. The report covers a situation over a year ago and indeed considers historic events going back further. So in the history of the school it covers a moment in time and tries to identify whether there were any learning points from what was a very difficult situation. Since then it is clear that the county council, in partnership with the headteacher, staff, and Interim Executive Board at Richmond School, has worked hard and secured an excellent present and future for the people who really matter – the students.

JUSTINE BROOKSBANK

Assistant Chief Executive, North Yorkshire County Council.