The body that represents local authorities across England has set out serious concerns over proposals to reopen primary schools on 1 June, as ministers appeared to row back on the idea after sustained criticism from councils and school leaders. With just 11 days until the government’s schools deadline, the Local Government Association, which represents most local authorities in England, said councils should be given access to local coronavirus testing data in order to safely reopen schools. “As there are different Covid-19 infection rates around the country, schools and councils must be able to work together to decide how and when schools open to more children. Some areas may want to work faster than others,” said Judith Blake, chair of the LGA’s children and young people board. “Councils also need crucial testing data to be shared with them, to help enable greater confidence for teachers and parents around school openings, and powers to manage outbreaks in places like schools, care homes, businesses and communities if new Covid-19 clusters emerge.” The government had said it wanted children in nursery, reception, year 1 and year 6 to begin a phased return to schools from 1 June, with other years following soon after, so that primary children have a month of school before the summer holidays. But the LGA’s intervention came as more councils in England distanced themselves from the government’s self-imposed target. Staffordshire county council, which includes the education secretary, Gavin Williamson’s, constituency of South Staffordshire, was among those saying they would leave decisions on reopening to headteachers. The Conservative-dominated West Sussex county council also said it did not feel bound by the 1 June target, saying in a statement: “It is our view that any phased return to schools needs to be managed safely and the practicalities of that phased return need to be considered carefully against each individual school’s risk assessment of what can be managed safely.” Graeme Miller, a Labour councillor and leader of Sunderland council, was more emphatic: “Our stance is clear: we cannot expect teachers, or children, to be in a school environment in Sunderland unless they know that it is safe for them, and there are serious question marks about that presently, based on the localised health picture in the north-east.” Miller said the country “was on a knife-edge in our fight against Covid-19 at this moment in time”, with only a limited understanding of whether, and how rapidly, children could pass on the virus. The government is now saying 1 June is not a fixed date and that ministers need to listen to the concerns of councils and teachers, with the justice secretary, Robert Buckland, striking a conciliatory note during a series of media interviews. In an interview with BBC Radio 4’s Today programme, the minister emphasised that the government was in listening mode: “We’ve got to listen to what we are being told and also to engage and to persuade and to make sure the necessary arrangements are in place. The government always said that we hoped that 1 June would be the date. It was conditional.” In another interview with BBC Breakfast, Buckland acknowledged teachers’ safety concerns. “I don’t think any of us want to put either children or our dedicated teaching staff in any danger at all, and the question of being safe is clearly paramount. “So we’re all working towards 1 June and planning for that return, but I accept the point that there may well be issues from employers that need to be addressed which might not mean we’ll see a uniform approach on 1 June.” As the number of deaths in care homes reached 11,600, the justice secretary also addressed questions about coronavirus testing, saying the NHS had been chosen as the focus instead of care homes and that was “right and essential” so as not to overwhelm hospitals. He told Sky News: “I think we rightly emphasised the importance of making sure our NHS services, our hospitals, were places that would continue to admit patients and wouldn’t be incubators of the disease. We achieved that. We protected our NHS.” Asked if the government focus on the health service had been to the detriment of care homes, Buckland replied: “I think we needed to make a choice about testing and we did decide to focus upon the NHS. “I think the issue with care homes is that we’ve got many thousands of different providers, different settings. There have been lots of examples of care homes that have mercifully stayed infection-free, but sadly far too many cases of infection and then death.” Asked to clarify his policy that the strategy was to “focus on the NHS first and foremost”, he said: “That’s right, and I think that was absolutely essential.” Deaths in care homes from coronavirus account for about of quarter of the total fatalities from the virus. However, Buckland later said that choosing between health settings and care was not a “binary choice” for the government. In an interview with ITV, he said: “We’ve been told time and time again rightly that hospitals are not the best settings for older people in terms of recovery. Therefore I don’t think anybody is to be blamed for wanting to get residents back into a familiar setting.”