House of Commons Education Committee The responsibilities of the Secretary of State Oral and written evidence 28 July 2010 Rt Hon Michael Gove MP and David Bell Ordered by The House of Commons to be printed 6 September 2010 HC 395-i Published on 27 October 2010 by authority of the House of Commons London: The Stationery Office Limited £0.00 Processed: 26-10-2010 14:13:35 Page Layout: COENEW [SO] PPSysB Job: 005600 Unit: PAG1 Education Committee: Evidence Ev 1 Oral evidence Taken before the Education Committee on Wednesday 28 July 2010 Members present: Mr Graham Stuart (Chair) Conor Burns Charlotte Leslie Nic Dakin Ian Mearns Pat Glass Tessa Munt Damian Hinds Lisa Nandy Liz Kendall Craig Whittaker Witnesses: Rt Hon Michael Gove MP,Secretary of State for Education, and David Bell, Permanent Secretary, Department for Education, gave evidence. Q1 Chair: Good morning. Welcome to this sitting of Department’s request from Partnerships for Schools the Education Committee, which is on the explicitly for use in a House of Commons debate. It responsibilities of the Secretary of State for was considered to be a valid comparison by that Education. I would like to welcome him and the body, so I felt that it was appropriate to use it in the Permanent Secretary from the Department to our House of Commons. There are a number of deliberations. Secretary of State, thank you for your comparisons that can be drawn. You can draw letter responding to my letter about the Sure Start comparisons, as I think I did, for example with the children’s centres report. In fact, we will have a full cost of building schools in Ireland, which is a point-by-point reply in the autumn, for which I am broadly comparable jurisdiction in a number of grateful. I also thank you for clarifying the position ways and has gone through similar property on the Early Years single funding formula, for which processes. The cost of building a school there is we are also grateful. Secretary of State, how much of something like two thirds of what Building Schools the information that you gave the House on 5 July for the Future costs. It is also the case that, in was accurate? conversations with Tim and other professionals at Michael Gove: I sought to give as much accurate Partnerships for Schools, I have been reinforced in information as possible about those schools that my conviction that we can procure schools much were going ahead as part of Building Schools for the more cheaply than has been the case in the past. I am Future and about those schools where, sadly, we grateful to Tim and his hard-working officials for were not able to continue construction. Before having worked with my team at the Department for making my statement, I sought to ensure that the Education in order to identify some of the cost accuracy of what I said to the House was as great as reductions that we can make, which will feed into a possible. As you and the Committee will know, there broader capital review. were some regrettable errors; I took the opportunity on the following Wednesday to apologise to the Q3 Chair: Thank you very much. When asked about House for the errors that were made, which were waste, Mr Byles acknowledged that there was some wholly my responsibility. and then immediately said that a lot of it was down to EU procurement rules. Do you accept that Q2 Chair: Thank you for that. You will have seen the analysis, and is there anything that can be done to transcript of yesterday’s evidence and know that Mr ensure that there aren’t these alternative models, Byles was asked specifically about the suggestion which are created at great expense and then have to that BSF had procured schools at three times the be scrapped—as Mr Byles put it, thrown in the bin? cost of commercial buildings. When asked if that Michael Gove: There are two very good points there. was accurate, he quite specifically said no. Could The first is the existence of EU procurement rules. It you respond to that? is certainly the case that EU procurement rules add Michael Gove: Yes; the information that BSF delay and cost to the process of procuring schools. buildings cost three times what commercial One of the reasons why I invoke that comparison buildings cost was information that we had received with Ireland—it is one of the reasons why we have from Partnerships for Schools. My Department had looked at Sweden—is that there are other European e-mailed Partnerships for Schools—actually prior to Union countries that can procure schools at a the Queen’s Speech—in order to get a comparison significantly lower cost. It is the case, in on a cost per square metre basis. The average cost of conversations that I have had with Mr Byles and his a Building Schools for the Future school is £1,800 highly professional team, that they have emphasised per square metre; we asked for comparisons with to me that while European Union procurement rules other buildings, and there were commercial are certainly a burden it is also the case that there are buildings that cost between £500 and £600 per other things that we can do in order to lower the cost square metre. That information was provided at my of schools, whether or not we use the procurement Processed: 26-10-2010 14:13:35 Page Layout: COENEW [E] PPSysB Job: 005600 Unit: PAG1 Ev 2 Education Committee: Evidence 28 July 2010 Rt Hon Michael Gove MP and David Bell model that Partnerships for Schools has used in the end, one of the ways in which Building Schools for past or an alternative one. There are changes that we the Future was meeting targets was by allocating can make to planning laws and to building money to local authorities on the basis not of need, regulations. It is also the case that there are changes but of a local authority’s readiness to meet some pre- that we can make to the other regulatory rules that set criteria. The other area in which I felt that we the Department has cleaved to in the past. For needed to change related to the fact that the whole example, there are regulations governing the procurement model meant that everyone had to sink environmental sustainability of buildings— a huge amount of cost into the process before bricks BREEAM regulations—which are for schools being were laid and before transformation could take rebuilt or refurbished, and have to be passed at a place. So you had anything between £7 million and particularly high threshold. I am very committed to £10 million being spent in the procurement process ensuring that new schools, and indeed all new on setting up a local education partnership. Once buildings, are environmentally sustainable, but the local education partnerships were set up, you would current regulatory framework is prescriptive in the have a process of procurement that led, to my mind, wrong way, and there are other ways in which we can to duplication. In terms of capturing some of the simultaneously lower costs and have greener benefits that have accrued—some of the insight— buildings, perhaps by having a greater degree of Tim and his team at Partnerships for Schools are system building and standardisation in the highly professional. They are collaborating with our procurement of schools. But this is work that is capital review, and the expertise and experience— going on with the capital review, and I have to say hard won—that the team has secured is being that I’ve been heartened and encouraged by the quarried by our capital review team. The cordial and professionalism and commitment that Tim and his productive relationship that the Department and team and Partnerships for Schools have shown in PfS has will inform the capital review in the future. this process. Chair: Thank you. May I now go to Tessa? Q4 Chair: Thank you very much for that. Any Q5 Tessa Munt: Might I ask you a slightly more analysis of BSF would accept that there was a lot of general question? I want to know what your vision waste, but that things have improved. One of the is for education. I want you to imagine that, fears, with the review team coming in, would be that inconveniently, I have a two-year-old, a four-year- some of the lessons that have been learned might be old, a seven-year-old, a nine-year-old, an 11-year- lost if every effort is not made to capture what has old, a 13-year-old and a 16-year-old. been learned in the last few years. Are you thinking Michael Gove: Congratulations. of a completely new start? To what extent will you Tessa Munt: Thank you. They’re a handful. I want ensure that the lessons are learned? you to imagine that, more inconveniently, some of Michael Gove: I do want to have a system that is those children live in a city and some live in a rural significantly more cost-effective. When I made the area. I want you to tell me what your vision is for the announcement on 5 July, I did so after a great deal of children who are already in the system and those thought. It was not an easy announcement to make, who will go into the system and through it. because, inevitably, I was in the business of Michael Gove: The first thing to say is, well done on disappointing hopes.