Cracks show in support for school model

States members are told they may well get their chance to block the one-school-two-sites plans. But the requete is not the right moment.

There is strong logic behind that. The business case and the independent project assurance review will add considerably to the information available to any deputies with doubts about the plans.

Education should be happy with that. It gives them their best chance of success to bring a cogent, well-researched argument to the States chamber.

The requete is more of a lottery. With no policy letter pinned to it, the debate becomes a shootout where deputies can be swayed by public pressure and emotion on the day.

It is an agenda set by Education’s opponents with public hostility to the plans at its heart.

Where the committee will be less happy is the wording of the rest of P&R’s statement.

There the finest of cracks opens up in what should be solid foundations.

P&R says that it cannot ‘simply state if we are “for” or “against” the new model’ and it would be wrong to prejudge its decision.

Supporters of the two-school model might question that. Yes, the business case must be taken seriously and, if it is not up to scratch, money should not be forthcoming.

However, the course of secondary transformation has been set by a sizeable majority of deputies in the States – more than once. In a consensus States, P&R is as committed to the direction as Education. It must be ‘for’ the new model.

The indication that P&R will not use its delegated authority to approve the business case is a two-edged sword. It undermines the requete but it also reopens the debate and gives opponents hope that all is not lost.

The key question is when that business case will be debated.

If it is after June, voters in the island-wide election will believe that they can influence the composition of the new Assembly and pick candidates on their side of the transformation debate. This debate is far from over.