Examination of Witnesses (Questions 740-759)
MS SALLY
BROOKS, MR
MARTIN LIPSON
AND MR
TIM BYLES
6 DECEMBER 2006
Q740 Mr Marsden: Tim, are you worried
about this? You are partially the motivator.
Mr Byles: Part of wanting to be
clear about the resources that are required, to set that out clearly
between the local authority and ourselves through the memorandum
of understanding that I mentioned, is about committing who is
going to commit what resources to make this occur. Although there
are problems in the process, we do apply additional resources
in order to try to make sure—
Q741 Mr Marsden: You have the ability.
Mr Byles: We do have the ability
to do so. We do not routinely say, "Tell us you have a problem
and we will give you some extra money," but, if there is
an issue, we have on several occasions over the last five weeks
looked at providing some additional resource to make sure that
it is adequately dealt with. But that should not take away from
the joint responsibility to resource this process adequately,
set at the beginning of the process.
Q742 Mr Marsden: Martin, can I ask
you briefly about the 4ps expert client programme which is referred
to in the DfES memo. I wonder if you could tell me, first of all,
how many authorities and schools have taken advantage of this.
If it is proving to be successful, is there a danger that you
will not have enough capacity to deal with it?
Mr Lipson: I think we have supported
32 of the 39 authorities in waves 1 to 3. We have supported all
the authorities that are hoping to come into the programme in
the next three waves that are new to the programme. It is a large
number of authorities we are trying to support with a modest sized
team.
Q743 Mr Marsden: That underlines
my second question, does it not?
Mr Lipson: We are reaching the
point where we are going to have to look very carefully at how
we apply our resources to supporting the authorities that need
us most. It does mean that some authorities that could benefit
from this sort of continuing help right through the procurement
stage may get less, but on a programme of this scale we have to
face the realities of the kind of support that can be offered
and it is not limitless.
Q744 Mr Marsden: I appreciate you
have to ration things, but how are you going to make sure that
the people who get left out are not the people who most need it
as opposed to those who are best at lobbying for it?
Mr Lipson: I think that is because
we have got to know the authorities pretty well. We have been
part of the process that you have heard described of Readiness
to Deliver, so I think we can identify the authorities that
really have been able to assemble high quality teams, that have
their governance arrangements in place, that understand about
best practice. We can afford to keep them at arm's length and
just touch base occasionally to make sure that they are in touch
with best practice. We will apply our resources to those we know
are not in that category.
Mr Byles: We are also taking an
assessment through the process of procurement. If there is a need
for resource, we identify it through that. We are not just taking
a snap shot at the beginning of the process. One of the important
things about this way forward and following is that, where we
have authorities that are ready to deliver, we are going to be
using the local government community itself to share best practice
and to help the sector generally through the boosted capacity
in the sector for those who are already engaged in the process.
So it is not just something that specialist organisations are
going to be doing. We want to engage and local government itself
is very keen to do this.
Q745 Mr Marsden: This is an issue
for Sally. There need to be the structures there to facilitate
that because my experience is that local government sometimes
is good at that but sometimes they need a bit of a shove.
Mr Byles: That is why we are taking
the assessment through the process.
Ms Brooks: I am sorry, I did not
hear what you said.
Q746 Mr Marsden: It is my experience,
that, although there is often a willingness in local government
to exchange best practice, they do need to be given a little bit
of infrastructure support and occasionally a little bit of a shove
to do it.
Ms Brooks: Yes. In the conferences,
meetings and events that we run, and the one we are doing for
the wave 4 launch in January, we make sure that we get the local
authorities that are experienced to talk to the new ones coming
in because that is how local authorities are most likely to learn.
They will listen to each other more than they will listen to me—quite
rightly.
Q747 Chairman: We are getting some
very valuable information here, but when we touch on capacity
you are at your most defensive. Every time we talk about the highly
skilled professionals that you need, both at local level and at
national level, it seems to me there is a concern and worry that
you are expressing.
Ms Brooks: Yes.
Q748 Chairman: If that is the case,
should the Building Schools for the Future programme be slowed
down? Why gallop towards it if there is going to be this problem?
Surely it is always better to invest in public sector building
when the private sector is languishing. Perhaps we should all
wait for a downturn in the housing market. Do you get my drift?
Ms Brooks: Yes, I think you are
right to say—and I hope we are not being defensive—that
it is our biggest concern. Probably all three of us would agree
that our biggest concern is that the capacity, the skills and
the experience is a limited pool. That said, I do not think if
you said to any local authority coming into BSF, "We would
like to slow you down, we are going to slow the process down,"
they would be very happy about it. A 15-year (at the very least)
programme is quite a long programme for those at the end of it,
and for us to say we are going to slow it down further would slightly
jeopardise confidence in BSF. We have worked hard with the private
sector to gain confidence, and with local governments later on
in the process to gain their confidence to make them believe that
it is coming eventually, and if we started to slow it down and
say it is not working properly, it would not help the process
of BSF rolling through with the private sector with the existing
local government.
Q749 Chairman: Is there a natural
slowdown process in it anyway in that you have already got lags
in it because the planning takes time and all that takes longer
than you will ever think?
Ms Brooks: Yes.
Mr Byles: It does take time but
I would not want the Committee to get the impression that this
is a show-stopping area of major concern. It is an issue which
we think is significant and needs to be properly managed through
time. In terms of our overall confidence levels on the deliverability
of this programme, that is increasing. It is not getting worse,
it is getting better. This is a key issue, however, that needs
to be got right through time and we are applying resources in
order to deliver that. I think it is important to understand the
balance of the point.
Chairman: I want to deal very briefly
before we finish—and we have had a long and good session
—with something about the primary capital programme.
Q750 Mr Carswell: Why are local authorities
being given this when we know that they are already stretched
to deliver on BSF and why are they using a different framework
and approach? Surely that is just going to create more bureaucracy
and make it more difficult for them?
Ms Brooks: The primary programme
is going to all local authorities so most of them will not be
stretched on BSF because they are not actually in BSF yet. The
thinking, as I outlined earlier, was that we started with repairs
and maintenance and we got targets and now we are doing a strategic
secondary level. The next step is really to do a strategic primary
programme. The primary programme is about looking strategically
at your primary estate and applying the same approach as BSF but
not in such an intense way. So it is saying look at what you are
doing with the secondary schools estate; look at what we have
said about re-thinking where your schools are, what size they
are, who delivers them, whether they are in the right, place whether
you have got extended schools. It is being rolled out quite slowly
and it is not a lumpy programme so it does not go as £150
million to a few local authorities every year. It is a slow burn,
if you like and local authorities have got three years to plan
for it. It comes in in 2009-10—and I am sure my colleagues
will tell me if I am wrong—and it is several million a year.
To most local authorities it is not a big project that they need
to mobilise very skilled procurement people for. It more or less
fits in with what they are doing already in their primary programme.
It fits in with the existing framework. Most local authorities
have existing frameworks for design and build and doing the work.
It is basically taking what they are already doing in their primary
programme and building on that, making it more strategic, and
making it match to some extent the strategic approach of BSF,
but without having that big lumpy "it is coming into town
and everything has to be thrown into it." This is a slower
approach.
Q751 Chairman: I was worried when
you said it is a different programme with different authorities
because surely you will be targeting similar authorities because
the criterion will be that those schools in the primary sector
in more challenging circumstances will be prioritised?
Ms Brooks: Within a local authority
we would expect them to reflect that in their strategic programme
but no, we are rolling it out across all 150 local authorities
every year. It is not like BSF in that it is not a small number
each year focused on deprivation and standards. It is rolled out
across all of them.
Mr Lipson: The authorities that
are already in the BSF programme have been thinking about their
primary estate and their primary transformation as well. You cannot
actually plan the secondary sector without thinking about what
is happening to the primary sector. To an extent, this is simply
recognising what is already happening in many authorities and
providing them with some additional funds to address some of the
issues there.
Q752 Chairman: Is it not a bit murky
as to where the money is coming from? The evidence we have got
suggests that the DfES is not going to provide all the capital
funding; it is going to come from other departments. Which other
departments and how much?
Ms Brooks: I do not recognise
that. What we are saying is that we are giving another £0.5
billion a year. We expect local authorities to match their own
funding to that.
Q753 Chairman: I have got here the
DfES says, "It will be essential that authorities use capital
from other sources—other government departments, local government
and the private sector—in order to create the greatest impact."
That is what I am referring to.
Ms Brooks: What we are saying
is that we are going to give an extra £0.5 billion a year
to this programme. We already give local authorities and schools
between them about £2-£2.5 billion a year in devolved
capital, which so far they have been using on repairs and maintenance.
They have done 10 years of repairs and maintenance so we are expecting
them to put some of that capital into the more strategic programme.
We are expecting them to use their Sure Start capital to be more
strategic and we are expecting them to join up with other funds
that they get around sports, health centres and so on, to have
a truly strategic approach. That is what we mean by that. You
cannot look at the £0.5 billion in isolation. They have already
got a lot of other money that we expect them to put into it.
Q754 Chairman: As I heard you talking
I have been making note of all the different people that will
impinge on Building Schools for the Future, there is not just
the National Strategy but the School Improvement Partners, the
Training Development Agency, the National College for School Leadership,
let alone our friends in the Specialist Schools and Academies
Trust. They all have purchase on this, do they not?
Ms Brooks: Yes.
Q755 Chairman: How do you balance
all this cacophony of sound and pressure?
Ms Brooks: With some difficulty.
Q756 Chairman: Where do you try and
do it?
Ms Brooks: We do a lot of it within
the Department, and with the BSF education advisers particularly.
We have got all these people in the DfES dealing with such a wide
range of different issues all of which BSF has got to address.
Within the Department we try to channel those to get them together
through our work and, as I said, then we work with the BSF education
people so there is a good crossover there. We send the BSF education
people out to the local authorities to distil the information
that we have all got together and the requirements and expectations.
You are absolutely right, they are very complex, and because BSF
is transformational it does have to hit all those things. Within
the Department we have to keep all these balls in the air and
make sure that my team and schools capital is talking to everybody,
and is ensuring that our strategic approach to BSF covers all
those areas.
Q757 Chairman: What would you say
if I said towards the end of listening to your very good responses
there were two concerns that seemed to me to keep coming out of
this session. First is the bit that sustainability is being squeezed
between getting this programme up and running, getting the construction,
building the partnership and sustainability, and it really seems
to be a bit squeezed here. Would you say that that would be fair?
Ms Brooks: No.
Mr Byles: No.
Q758 Chairman: No?
Ms Brooks: No, I do not think
so.
Q759 Chairman: It comes through from
some of your responses when we pushed you on, "Okay, what
about the early ones seeming less sustainable than you thought?"
Ms Brooks: I think everything
is on an upward curve. One thing about BSF is that we are constantly
trying to balance transformational change on every aspect of what
it is delivering with meeting a programme, so I do not think anything
in particular is being squeezed. I think there is always a flex
between how transformational you want to be—whether it is
in extended schools, whether it is in ITC, whether it is in sustainability—and
how long that takes. I do not think anything is being particularly
squeezed more than anything else. There is always a tension, there
is always a compromise between we could sit here forever and get
it perfect but we have got to drive the programme forward. I think
that is both the challenge and also the fascination of it.
Chairman: Okay, that was the squeeze.
The other bit was were you fully engaged with the other bit of
sustainability, what was going in that classroom in the 21st century?
Were you pulling that? You did say yes, we are having that engagement,
we are doing that. That is not a question; I will leave it in
your minds. It has been a very good session and thank you for
your attendance. There were two or three things that came up where
we would like a written response. Thank you very much.
| 
