Readers are aware of the cancellation of the Building Schools for the Future (BSF) programme in Wyre Forest, but e-mails to me suggest there is still some confusion to what is going on and why. The background to all this is the Wyre Forest Schools Review. About ten years ago, the Labour government ordered that Wyre Forest deal with falling standards, empty classrooms and below average 6th formers staying on. The county council undertook a full review that not only looked at these issues, but also looked at the fact that Wyre Forest was on a three tier system of first, middle and high schools - something made us different from the wider country where over 90% of schools are on the familiar two tier system of primaries and secondaries.
The council conducted not one, but two surveys of parents and teachers and in 2005 announced the changes would go ahead. This was a rationalisation of around 50 three tier schools into a little over 30 two tier schools. This was to be financed by some land sales of school sites no longer needed, and some council internal reserves. It was a tremendous opportunity to deliver 21st century schools for Wyre Forest and something that I welcomed, although acutely aware that top priority must be to ensure that children's education did not suffer in any way through the whole process.
However, since 2005, the Labour government introduced the concept of Building Schools for the Future. This was a flashy announcement whereby huge numbers of schools would get fabulous rebuilds. Around 1,500 schools signed up to this and Wyre Forest secondary schools - of which there are five - were persuaded to do likewise.
The key to BSF is not the new builds, but the way they are financed. Rather than have the local authority pay for the schools up front (as is the case with the primary school developments in Wyre Forest), the government insisted that the schools enter into a private finance initiative (PFI) contract with a PFI Provider to deliver the schools. This is not dissimilar to a traditional mortgage that many people will be familiar with. But there are key differences.
The PFI contract - the mortgage - is a twenty five year pay back mortgage. Many people may have gone to a high street bank seeking a twenty five year repayment mortgage, so will understand the concept that after twenty five years of interest and repayments, you own your home outright. But that is where the similarity ends.
A PFI, BSF contract requires a twenty five year repayment mortgage but it carries huge on-costs. For example, if you buy your house through a bank mortgage, you are free to choose what internet services you use. Not so with BSF. Schools have to use the ICT provision from the PFI provider at a cost that is built into the original contract. This leaves schools no room to shop around for best value for money, or even the best services. This is a worry for the schools. In your own home, you can hang pictures wherever you like. Again, schools need permission from the PFI provider to hang student's artwork - something that every school is brightened by. And did I mention that the schools hand back the buildings every night? If they want to hold an evening event, they need to rent the buildings from the PFI provider.
But not only is the deal for the schools questionable, the whole BSF process is complex in the absurd. There are nine processes that the schools need to undertake and each process has up to 15 sub-processes. The costs of going through this procedure are colossal and Worcestershire County Council has spent £3 million just completing forms for Wyre Forest. It has been good for some - one BSF consultant has made, personally, over £1 million on helping people fill in the forms in just two years. Amazing.
This horrific waste of public money had to stop and it had to stop immediately. That is why Michael Gove and the coalition government have put a stop to the BSF programme. And it is this kind of headline grabbing money wasting that has led our country to near financial ruin. Now we pay the price of this waste and we are undergoing the hangover as a direct result of the binge-fest of the Labour years.
But where does this leave schools such as the Wyre Forest secondaries?
That we need investment in our schools is obvious. Taking away the middle schools leaves a capacity problem and it must be dealt with. That is why I am working with the schools and the county council to reinforce our case that we cannot go on as we are. We are constructing a sound case that Wyre Forest is special and must be given high priority when the limited schools capital funds are allocated.
There will be schools rebuilding after BSF. But it will not be done like this, on a spendthrift exercise of wasting for the sake of a good headline. It will be done from a capital budget on a needs basis, with no mortgage, no expensive processes, and no commitment to expensive add-ons like computers and internet.
The coalition government is committed to a reduction in the size of the state of 25% by 2015. The Labour government promised 20% reduction. Would BSF have survived if Labour had got re-elected? No one can tell, but if it had, more public sector jobs would have had to have been cut to be able to pay the PFI costs.
One last thought. With the schools being committed to such an expensive PFI contract, they may well have been forced to make a decision between PFI payments; or teachers - especially with the cuts looming. Buildings don't teach: teachers do. There are difficult decision being made, but a good teacher is far more important than a shiny building.