Bruising start for Education in colleges’ funding debate

The committee’s proposal to end taxpayers’ support of Blanchelande, Elizabeth and The Ladies’ College by 2031 faced a barrage of opposition as the Assembly started debate on a series of amendments drawn up to maintain public funding of the independent schools.

Deputies usually supportive of the Education Committee were among its harshest critics.

‘We didn’t need to be in this position,’ said Nick Moakes.

‘It looks like the decision to remove funding was made first and the policy letter was then framed to support that decision.

‘In my view, rather than taking an objective look at funding and education, this policy letter represents the flawed and one-sided ideological views of the committee.

‘There appears to have been a distinct lack of consultation, it ignored the elephant in the room, and the colleges’ views are expressed only as an appendix, an afterthought.’

• Listen to a round-up of Thursday’s debate on our Shorthand States podcast

The colleges’ current funding agreement with the States, worth nearly £3m. a year, ends in 2026.

Negotiations on the next funding agreement started more than two years ago, but Deputy Moakes claimed it was clear that the committee had ‘failed to listen or even respond’ to counter-arguments.

Education members argued that grant funding the colleges was educationally and financially unfair to States schools, which they claimed had space to accommodate a significant number of fee-paying students at lower cost.

They rejected suggestions that a phased withdrawal of taxpayers’ funding would inevitably push up the colleges’ fees, which are currently between about £14,500 and £15,500 a year.

‘The median household income for college families is between £91,000 and £102,000 a year compared to £53-58,000 for families in the States sector,’ said Education member Andy Cameron.

‘I’m all for fairness, but doesn’t it seem like all taxpayers, many of whom are on lower incomes, are subsidising those who can already afford to pay?’

Deputy Cameron explained that fees would go up by about £40 a week even if the colleges did increase them to replace all of their income lost from the States and described that sum as ‘the cost of a manicure, a bottle of wine at a restaurant or a couple of takeaway coffees a day’.

Deputy Moakes painted a different picture of the financial circumstances of parents with children at the colleges.

‘I have heard of parents who forego holidays or take out loans or rely on financial support from family or friends or take on more than one job or work seven days a week,’ he said. ‘The narrative that all parents who send their children to the colleges are rich is utter, utter nonsense.’

Lyndon Trott claimed that parents at the colleges were effectively saving the States money by funding most of their child’s education themselves.

He said that a person on median earnings typically did not pay anywhere near enough income tax each year to meet the cost of a single place in a States secondary school.

Deputy Trott also warned the Assembly of what he saw as unintended consequences of Education’s bid to scrap public funding, including higher class sizes.

‘Not only would we be burdening the taxpayer with more costs of £12,000-13,000 a year per pupil, but potentially as a consequence we would materially damage educational standards. I’m not prepared to do that, but I am prepared to find a compromise,’ he said.

He estimated that deputies had received ‘three or four’ messages in support of Education’s proposals but ‘hundreds’ against.

Deputy Steve Falla said the colleges were ‘an economic enabler’ for Guernsey and that there had never been a more important time to ensure the island was an attractive place for inward investment and labour.

Education member Sue Aldwell estimated that about 200 of the emails received against the committee’s proposals were from the colleges’ parents or staff.

‘By the letters I have received over the past few days, I can only assume that many have little understanding of the work and dedication we witness on a regular basis in States schools and which I feel the need to defend,’ she said.

Her committee wants some of the money saved from removing the colleges’ grants to be invested in the States sector.

‘We have many talented young people developed in States schools,’ said Deputy Aldwell.

‘We offer a well-rounded education with many opportunities for young people, with a broad curriculum and enrichment. What we have also seen is the need to invest in early years, putting in building blocks early on, and investing in students with additional needs.

‘We have to make sure we meet every student’s needs, challenging high achievers and building all students’ capacity in knowledge and skills.’