Mr Steven Ballantyne

Introduction

Mr Steven Ballantyne is a former music tutor who was banned from teaching indefinitely in January 2024 after being convicted of an act of outraging public decency. Ballantyne worked for Northumberland County Council’s Music Partnership Service within its Children’s Services Directorate from 3 November 2005, and was arrested in January 2021 on suspicion of the offence. He did not attend his Teaching Regulation Agency (TRA) professional conduct panel hearing, was not represented, and did not admit the allegation, but the panel accepted his certificate of conviction as conclusive proof. The decision maker acting for the Secretary of State imposed a prohibition order with no review period and no right to apply for restoration, citing the seriousness of the sexual misconduct and the lack of full insight or remorse.

Background Information

Ballantyne commenced employment with Northumberland County Council, based at Morpeth, on 3 November 2005, working as a music tutor for the council’s Music Partnership Service in Children’s Services. On 28 January 2021 he was arrested on suspicion of engaging in an act of outraging public decency. An internal disciplinary investigation began on 3 February 2021; an investigatory interview was held with him on 2 March 2021 and a second investigatory meeting on 26 May 2021; a disciplinary hearing followed on 15 July 2021. On 9 August 2022 he was found guilty at Newcastle upon Tyne Crown Court of an act of outraging public decency, and on 30 September 2022 he was sentenced. The notice of proceedings dated 11 October 2023 alleged one count: conviction of a relevant offence.

The Controversy or Incident That Led to Their Cancellation

Allegations and findings. The finding in this section is that of a Teaching Regulation Agency professional conduct panel, which accepted a certificate of conviction — conclusive proof of both the conviction and the facts it necessarily implied. Mr Ballantyne did not participate: he was not present, was not represented, and provided no admission of fact. The conviction is stated flatly: on 9 August 2022, at Newcastle upon Tyne Crown Court, he was found guilty of an act of outraging public decency.

The hearing took place virtually, in public, on 21 December 2023, and was recorded. The panel concluded his absence was voluntary, that he knew the matter would proceed without him, and that it was in the public interest to continue; no witnesses were called, the case resting on the documents and the certificate of conviction. On 30 September 2022 he had been sentenced to five months’ imprisonment, wholly suspended for two years, with 200 hours of unpaid work, a 30-day rehabilitation activity requirement, a requirement to register with the police for five years, a five-year sexual harm prevention order and a £128 victim surcharge. The panel found the allegation proved and the conviction a relevant offence: the behaviour involved could have affected the safety of pupils and the public, and the offence — involving sexual activity — is one the regulator’s Advice treats as more likely to be a relevant offence. The suspended imprisonment was, in the panel’s view, indicative of the seriousness of the offending.

Notably, the panel found that none of the offence-relevance behaviours in the Advice’s lists — those that would make a prohibition order plainly appropriate — were made out in the way they might otherwise be, yet it still concluded the conviction amounted to a relevant offence and recommended prohibition. It weighed mitigating factors he submitted in a written statement: in eighteen years at the council he had “trained, re-trained, and constantly reinforced” his safeguarding commitment, and he had previous good character with no adverse regulatory findings. Against that, the panel found there was limited evidence of regret or remorse, no evidence he had contributed significantly to the education sector, and no evidence his actions were not deliberate. The panel concluded the public interest outweighed his interests, with the serious nature of the offence — which it described as involving serious sexual misconduct — a significant factor.

Public Reaction and Consequences

The published decision records no press coverage or public statements. The recorded consequences are the internal disciplinary process begun within a week of his arrest in 2021, the criminal conviction and sentence in 2022, and the TRA referral that ended in prohibition. The panel found public and child protection concerns were raised by the offence, that public confidence in the profession could be seriously weakened if such conduct were not treated with the utmost seriousness, and that his conduct ran counter to what should be at the core of a teacher’s practice with a duty of care towards children — even though the offending took place outside an education setting. The Secretary of State’s decision maker later gave considerable weight to the panel’s finding of limited evidence of regret or remorse, judging that this lack meant some risk of repetition remained.

Current Status

On 4 January 2024, decision maker Sarah Buxcey, acting on behalf of the Secretary of State, prohibited Mr Steven Ballantyne from teaching indefinitely: he cannot teach in any school, sixth form college, relevant youth accommodation or children’s home in England. Because the offence involved serious sexual misconduct, the panel recommended no review period, and the decision maker agreed, finding that allowing one would not be sufficient to maintain public confidence given the seriousness of the findings and the lack of full insight or remorse. In view of the seriousness of the allegation found proved, she further decided he shall not be entitled to apply for restoration of his eligibility to teach. The order took effect from the date it was served on him, with a right of appeal to the High Court within 28 days.

Impact on Their Career/Life

Ballantyne’s dismissal from a career of eighteen years — however it formally concluded after the July 2021 disciplinary hearing — was followed by a criminal conviction and then a permanent, unreviewable teaching ban. The case illustrates that a first offence, a suspended sentence, and an otherwise unblemished record do not avert prohibition where the conviction is for sexual misconduct: the panel acknowledged his mitigation and previous good history, but found the evidence of remorse limited and treated the offence’s sexual nature as decisive. The decision maker accepted the ban deprives the public of his contribution, but judged that a published decision not backed by full remorse or insight could not satisfy the public interest in confidence in the profession.

Sources

• Teaching Regulation Agency, “Teacher misconduct panel outcome: Mr Steven Ballantyne” — source