‘Waste’ claim over schools programme
Spending on school buildings rose from £600m in 1996-97 to £6.8bn in 2009-10, according to official figures.
But an independent review by Sebastian James, group operations director for Dixons, concluded that systems for allocating funding are time-consuming, expensive and fail to target money where it is needed.
Advertisement
Hide AdAdvertisement
Hide AdThe £55bn Building Schools for the Future (BSF) scheme, which was controversially scrapped by Education Secretary Michael Gove last summer, comes under heavy fire.
The James review concludes that BSF did not provide consistent quality, or low cost, and that schools were created to “bespoke” designs.
It calls for future new buildings to be based on “a clear set of standardised drawings” which would effectively mean that new schools could be identical to each other.
The review also estimates that around 30 per cent could be saved from school building costs.
Advertisement
Hide AdAdvertisement
Hide AdThe review acknowledges that there are “significant” parts of England’s school estate that are in an “unacceptable state”.
But it adds that there is “little evidence” that a school building that is more than simply fit for purpose can boost standards.