Why is new-school cost estimate so much more than in UK?

At half of this, it would still be very expensive against what is achieved in the UK.

This would make it the most expensive school ever constructed in the British Isles.

The fact is, it is not good value for money – for it to be so, the Education Department would have to demonstrate that there was some additional benefit to be gained by spending what is an extraordinary amount of money.

Forget sport tourism, this is a weak excuse to cover what is an unaffordable project. It is a school that is being built and the project must stand on its own merit as a school but at nearly three times the cost of the equivalent in the UK, how can this be so? And the consequence will be higher ongoing costs as a result, a yearly cost for amortisation at £1m. and cost of finance at somewhere between £3m. and £4m., an amount per student per year of the order of £5,000.

It is difficult to understand how this can be put forward as value for money and affordable, especially when the States are under pressure to introduce GST because of shortage of funds. Moreover, why was a target cost not set before the project was designed?

There are plenty of case studies in the UK regarding obtaining value for money on new schools – have any discussions taken place with UK developers to identify what costs can be achieved for new school projects given the UK government sets a cost per sq. metre limit of £1,800, which from information I have seen on the internet is being achieved?

As a developer and in comparison to the UK, the last project I built three years ago was a 4,000 sq. metre office, training centre and workshop for one of Europe's biggest engineering companies and this to a high specification at less than £700 per sq. metre. OK, not a school, but built to a high standard.

I think this time Treasury has got to throw it out and say think again to the Education Department and set a sensible budget for the project, sub-£30m.

G. M. OLDROYD,

St Martin's.

Editor's footnote: Education minister Robert Sillars responds:

'Thank you for the opportunity to respond.

Your correspondent does not appear to be correctly informed about the La Mare de Carteret redevelopment project.

We are not proposing to build just one school. The project includes a new high school for up to 600 students, a new primary school for up to 420 pupils, a new communication and autism base for up to 36 children, a

pre-school, a sports hall with spectator seating for up to 500 people, which can be used by the island's sporting community for club-level competitions and training out of school hours, plus a small suite of rooms for community use during the day.

Yes, this does come with a big price tag of £59.44m. at today's prices but the Education Department believes it has demonstrated both the overwhelming need for these new facilities and also that the project as a whole represents best value.

As part of the States-approved review process, the project's quantity surveyors have continually benchmarked the La Mare de Carteret schools against UK schemes, Les Beaucamps School and the Baubigny Schools to ensure value for money to the States.

With any comparator, it is important that we are comparing like with like. The writer is indeed correct in stating that the cost of the new school is estimated at £64.5m. What he/she fails to recognise is that this is the total development cost, including fitting out the building, ICT costs, design team fees, central costs and inflation to completion in 2018. The UK figures quoted are not outturn costs, but pure construction and, therefore, exclude approximately 40% of the total development expenditure.

The estimated construction cost (current day) for the La Mare de Carteret Schools project is £45m. and, of course, this cost includes the two schools on the site, plus all the other facilities outlined above.

The writer mentions a figure of 'sub-£30m.', which we assume is his/her estimated current-day construction cost based on UK rates.

This fails to account for the fact that projects of this size cost between 23% and 30% more in Guernsey than in the UK. This is due to specifying materials for a marine environment to meet life expectancies of 60 years (whereas in the UK the emphasis is generally on a cheaper build with recurrent replacement and maintenance costs), shipping, logistics and the split in terms of on-/off-island procurement.

While UK school projects may have been constructed at £1,800 per sq. metre 18 months ago, this is no longer the case.

The Education Funding Agency is currently struggling with high demand and increased costs, as reported in Building Magazine (5 September 2014). Latest figures for EFA schemes in the UK are indicating costs in the order of £2,250 per sq.metre to £2,450 per sq. metre. Again, this is the construction cost and not total development cost.

We would add that schools are not simple buildings and cannot be compared to offices, workshops or warehouses. They are often complex buildings with varying requirements for adjacent rooms in terms of environmental control with detailed acoustic, cooling, heating, lighting and specialist fit-out requirements. The impact that the internal and external environment of the school has on children and learning is well publicised and should not be underestimated as we look to create the best learning environments to enable the children of Guernsey to reach their potential.

It is all described in the States report and particularly in appendices nine, 11 and 12, all of which are freely available on the department's website, www.education.gg/LMDC, but we would be happy to meet with your correspondent to explain the robust business justification for this project and how the cost plan has been put together. If he/she would like to email the Education Department at LMDC@education.gov.gg, we would be happy to arrange this.'