Scrutiny needed to prove value

It is very good at making big sweeping statements and the odd unnecessary history lesson but what it is not saying or justifying is just as interesting.

Take the size of the extensions and upgrades being planned for Les Beaucamps and St Sampson's High.

History is littered with Education falling out with those holding the purse strings over the size of its developments.

The latest report is light on detail of what the physical class sizes will be. It is silent on what teacher/pupil ratios are expected.

Worried about traffic? Clearly Education is, having earmarked some off site drop off and pick up zones but not said where, potentially disrupting even more householders.

You have to read through to the appendices to find out that provision for PE is being cut in Year 9 compared to what is currently available. There will also be a reduction in Key Stage 4.

When it comes to the decision to duplicate sixth form provision on the two sites, it admits that there will be additional costs, but shrugs these away by saying there are other efficiencies in its model. It leaves the question about whether one sixth form would not only be better value, but educationally superior too.

It remains very hard to begin to unravel whether there is actually value for money in these proposals, with millions being banded around here and there and then shuffled around it all becomes somewhat mindboggling, with comparisons used to unattributed current costs, or estimated costs from a different committee depending on the circumstances.

Education’s report is criticised in today’s paper by a teaching union, parents and a former committee member for lacking detail in different ways, but time is now pressing for those that would seek more answers.

It is time like these where a system that had a vigorous parliamentary scrutiny function to cut through the waffle and distractions would be invaluable.